I am writing you today in response to your request that I, as a Psychology student, critique and offer my advice to you in regards to your decision in the R. v. Sykes (2014) case that occurred on September 5th, 2014. I would like to start by commenting that my initial reaction to this decision was quite positive. While conducting my thorough read of this case and decision you seemed to reference many other cases where the problem was with eyewitness testimony. I believe, and as you may as well, that one of the biggest problems with the case of R. v. Sykes (2014) was that the police and detectives involved with this case did not conduct a photo or live lineup. This procedure is very important to do right away, as eye witness memory may not actually
…show more content…
So, because no lineup was executed was of course my biggest concern as a Psychologist. Secondly, I think another important and very relevant topic that relates to the field of psychology and law and more pressingly one that emerged in this case is that of cross-racial identifications. Studies in the field of psychology such as one conducted by Osborne and Davies (2014) demonstrate that the type of crime along with racial factors of both the perpetrator and the witness will have an effect on how the eyewitness perceives and remembers the event or crime. This study showed that eyewitnesses may in fact recall that the perpetrator looked more or less like themselves depending on stereotype factors that were at play during the crime (Osborne & Davies, 2014). Scientific psychological research validates that there is in fact an issue when the eyewitness to a crime is of one race and the suspect or perpetrator is of another race, and it is referred to as a cross-race or own-race bias. This was evident throughout the present case of R. v. Sykes (2014), and it was particularly noted when eyewitness Ms. Ackerman identified Sykes in court during her testimony, when he (Sykes) was the only black man present and who was the only one not in police or other clothing of …show more content…
As scientific research has shown, there are many factors that all influence eyewitness’ memory, from weapons being present to cross-racial identifications and even light-dark adaptation. Some of these very important factors were present in the current case which could certainly have influenced the accuracy of the eyewitness’s recount of the robbery. In saying this, however, there has been some new research looking at how stressful events, or having higher stress levels right before witnessing an event, may actually lead to better information encoding and therefore better memory for the event or situation. In work done by Hoscheidt, LaBar, Ryan, Jacobs and Nadel (2014) they demonstrate this finding by showing in their study that participants who were exposed to stress actually had a better overall memory for a slideshow they were shown afterwards (Hoscheidt et al., 2014). Although this evidence is contradictory to the other evidence presented in this article, it might explain why one of the witnesses felt comfortable enough to identify Sykes in court as the perpetrator. Although I agree it was the right decision to dismiss the in dock identification, I felt as though this new information might be useful for future reference of the psychological science
So, because no lineup was executed was of course my biggest concern as a Psychologist. Secondly, I think another important and very relevant topic that relates to the field of psychology and law and more pressingly one that emerged in this case is that of cross-racial identifications. Studies in the field of psychology such as one conducted by Osborne and Davies (2014) demonstrate that the type of crime along with racial factors of both the perpetrator and the witness will have an effect on how the eyewitness perceives and remembers the event or crime. This study showed that eyewitnesses may in fact recall that the perpetrator looked more or less like themselves depending on stereotype factors that were at play during the crime (Osborne & Davies, 2014). Scientific psychological research validates that there is in fact an issue when the eyewitness to a crime is of one race and the suspect or perpetrator is of another race, and it is referred to as a cross-race or own-race bias. This was evident throughout the present case of R. v. Sykes (2014), and it was particularly noted when eyewitness Ms. Ackerman identified Sykes in court during her testimony, when he (Sykes) was the only black man present and who was the only one not in police or other clothing of …show more content…
As scientific research has shown, there are many factors that all influence eyewitness’ memory, from weapons being present to cross-racial identifications and even light-dark adaptation. Some of these very important factors were present in the current case which could certainly have influenced the accuracy of the eyewitness’s recount of the robbery. In saying this, however, there has been some new research looking at how stressful events, or having higher stress levels right before witnessing an event, may actually lead to better information encoding and therefore better memory for the event or situation. In work done by Hoscheidt, LaBar, Ryan, Jacobs and Nadel (2014) they demonstrate this finding by showing in their study that participants who were exposed to stress actually had a better overall memory for a slideshow they were shown afterwards (Hoscheidt et al., 2014). Although this evidence is contradictory to the other evidence presented in this article, it might explain why one of the witnesses felt comfortable enough to identify Sykes in court as the perpetrator. Although I agree it was the right decision to dismiss the in dock identification, I felt as though this new information might be useful for future reference of the psychological science