A Call for Precedential Heads: Why the Supreme Court's Eyewitness Identification Jurisprudence Is Anachronistic and Out-of-Step with the Empirical Reality

By TerBeek, Calvin J. | Law and Psychology Review, Annual 2007 | Go to article overview

A Call for Precedential Heads: Why the Supreme Court's Eyewitness Identification Jurisprudence Is Anachronistic and Out-of-Step with the Empirical Reality


TerBeek, Calvin J., Law and Psychology Review


All the evidence points rather strikingly to the conclusion that there is almost nothing more convincing than a live human being who takes the stand, points a finger at the defendant, and says, "That's the one!" (1)

Do you solemnly swear before the everliving God that the testimony you are about to give in this cause shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

No, I don't. I can tell you what I saw and what I heard and I'll swear to that by the everliving God but the more I study about it the more sure I am that nobody but the everliving God knows the whole truth and if you summoned Christ as a witness in this case what He would tell you would burn your insides with the pity and the mystery of it. (2)

I. INTRODUCTION

It seems that nearly every eyewitness identification paper of late begins with an eye-opening (pun intended) story of how an innocent man was convicted via a faulty eyewitness identification. I will resist the urge to do the same and instead ask a question that gets to the heart of the eyewitness identification debate: what does the empirical evidence tell us?

Social science researchers have been warning us of the deep and inherent flaws in eyewitness identifications for nearly a half-century, (3) and according to two recent studies 75 % of those exonerated via DNA testing have been convicted in large part due to mistaken eyewitness identifications. (4) So while it is known that eyewitness testimony has played a role in the convictions of defendants later proven innocent, what has not been explored is (1) how and to what degree what I will call the "ground level" appellate courts (5) have relied on this type of evidence in affirming the convictions of the innocent and (2) in light of this, how best to effectuate the needed system-wide reform. This Article will use a sample of eighteen actual innocence cases in which inaccurate eyewitness identifications demonstrably played a central role in the conviction. These cases provide an invaluable tool with which to examine the current state of eyewitness identification jurisprudence in this country and they provide a lucid picture of current deficiency of the law in this area. While some reform has been achieved, it is clear that the time has come for the United States Supreme Court to overrule Neil v. Biggers and Manson v. Brathwaite as empirically inconsistent with the due process protection afforded to criminal defendants by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. (6)

The Article is organized as follows. Part II recounts the major problems that social scientists have diagnosed with eyewitness identifications and introduces the relevant vocabulary and concepts. This is important as an empirical comparison point to the intuitions of generalist appellate court judges about what constitutes a fair identification process. Part III recounts the Supreme Court's eyewitness identification jurisprudence. This provides us with an opportunity to see how the Court initially embraced a project to make eyewitness identification procedures more reliable. However, as the Court went through personnel changes in the early 1970s, its decisions mostly ignored the empirical evidence--then the Court ignored the entire issue of eyewitness identifications altogether. Part IV looks at the various standards of review that appellate courts apply when reviewing eyewitness identification challenges. This is crucial because it can many times be dispositive as to how the case is resolved. Part V examines the appellate court opinions in our sample affirming the convictions of the innocent to elucidate how appellate courts treat eyewitness evidence on review and demonstrates that the judges' assumptions are markedly inconsistent with the empirical evidence. (7) Part VI consists of recommendations and Part VII concludes.

II. THE VAGARIES OF EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION (8)

The fact that research psychologists have been expressing concerns about the accuracy and reliability of eyewitness identifications for nearly a half-century (9) and that the law enforcement community has turned a collective blind eye to these concerns, (10) says something important about the intellectual inertia this type of evidence enjoys in the legal arena.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A Call for Precedential Heads: Why the Supreme Court's Eyewitness Identification Jurisprudence Is Anachronistic and Out-of-Step with the Empirical Reality
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.