Adam Liptak wrote an article in The New York Times about reliability of witnesses testimonies and judges discretion to include or exclude such testimonies in the court. This article came in light after the Supreme Court ruling on the same issue at hand. The Court and multiple studies all suggest how “unusually problematic and unusually persuasive” eyewitness testimonies are (Liptak, 2011, para. 1). In Barion Perry's case, the members of the court did not seem moved to challenge the usefulness of a witness that identified Mr. Perry late at night and from a distance. His lawyer stated a precedent which would allow a hearing before a judge to decide whether eyewitness testimony can be presented to the jury based on a suggestive police
