Unfair (53 page)

She was seventy-four years old:
Downey, “Sharper Eyewitnessing”; Rankin, “Innocent Man's Conviction.”

The only light came from:
Innocence Project, “John Jerome White.”

And before leaving, the perpetrator:
Rankin, “Innocent Man's Conviction.”

Research shows that a witness's eyesight:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 60–61; Jean H. Searcy, “Age Differences in Accuracy and Choosing in Eyewitness Identification and Face Recognition,”
Memory and Cognition
27 (1999): 538.

For instance, one study showed that:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 60.

Simply by altering the conditions:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 57; D. Stephen Lindsay, J. Don Read, and Kusum Sharma, “Accuracy and Confidence in Person Identification: The Relationship Is Strong When Witnessing Conditions Vary Widely,”
Psychological Science
9 (1998): 215–18.

In White's case, for example:
Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications.”

Research suggests that people are 50 percent:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 63; Christian A. Meissner and John C. Bringham, “Thirty Years of Investigating the Own-Race Bias in Memory for Faces: A Meta-Analytic Review,”
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law
7 (2001): 3–35.

The same is true of identifying:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 63; Matthew G. Rhodes and Jeffrey S. Anastasi, “The Own-Age Bias in Face Recognition: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review,”
Psychological Bulletin
138 (2012): 146–74.

Researchers have also shown that:
Research suggests that while a slightly heightened level of anxiety can improve accuracy, high levels of stress are clearly detrimental. Tim Valentine and Jan Mesout, “Eyewitness Identification Under Stress in the London Dungeon,”
Applied Cognitive Psychology
23 (2009): 153; Simon,
In Doubt
, 61; Kenneth A. Deffenbacher et al., “A Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of High Stress on Eyewitness Memory,”
Law and Human Behavior
28 (2004): 687–706.

In one study, for example, participants:
Valentine, “Eyewitness Identification Under Stress,” 154.

Participants who did not find:
Valentine, “Eyewitness Identification Under Stress,” 158; Simon,
In Doubt
, 62. While about 54 percent of high-anxiety participants picked an innocent person out of the lineup and only around 18 percent made an accurate identification, 75 percent of low-anxiety participants made an accurate identification. Valentine, “Eyewitness Identification Under Stress,” 158; Simon,
In Doubt
, 62.

When a weapon is aimed at us:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 62; Nancy M. Steblay, “A Meta-Analytic Review of the Weapon Focus Effect,”
Law and Human Behavior
16 (1992): 413–24.

Our memories may also be compromised:
Lorraine Hope et al., “Witnesses in Action: The Effects of Physical Exertion on Recall and Recognition,”
Psychological Science
23 (2012): 386, doi: 10.1177/0956797611431463,
http://pss.sagepub.com/​content/​23/4/386
.

In one simulation study:
Hope et al., “Witnesses in Action,” 387–88.

Not only did they struggle to recall:
Hope et al., “Witnesses in Action,” 387–88.

One implication is that when:
Hope et al., “Witnesses in Action,” 386.

It's likely that they just:
Hope et al., “Witnesses in Action,” 388–89.

Yet these officials have significant:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 57.

And the processes and practices we use:
Of course, the two types of factors often interact with each other: someone who sees a suspect in low light for a short period of time is likely to be more susceptible to the misleading influence of a police officer. Simon,
In Doubt
, 57–58.

It's strange, then, to discover:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 69. For example, in 2007, the Georgia Innocence Project found that 82 percent of Georgia's law enforcement agencies had no recorded standardized eyewitness identification procedure. Dorie Turner, “DNA Test Clears Man After 27 Years,”
USA Today
, December 11, 2007,
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/​news/nation/2007​-12-11-524839445_x.htm
.

A large majority of officers:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 76 n. 130.

The real-life rape case:
Innocence Project, “John Jerome White.”

When a Georgia Bureau of Investigations:
Innocence Project, “John Jerome White.”

Those who view a composite image:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 64; Gary L. Wells, Steve D. Charman, and Elizabeth A. Olson, “Building Face Composites Can Harm Lineup Identification Performance,”
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
11 (2005): 147–56.

But the very process of working:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 65; Wells, Charman, and Olson, “Building Face Composites,” 147–56.

In White's case, any distortion:
We do not have a copy of the original photographic array because it was not preserved but it almost certainly showed White along with a number of other men. Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications.”

On the positive side, photo arrays:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 51–52. Show-ups constitute approximately half of identifications that end up being prosecuted. Simon,
In Doubt
, 69.

Cops like show-ups because:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 70.

For one thing, when witnesses are shown:
Neil Brewer and Gary Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,”
Current Directions in Psychological Science
20 (2011): 24.

After being told that they chose:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 56; Lisa E. Hasel and Saul M. Kassin, “On the Presumption of Evidentiary Independence: Can Confessions Corrupt Eyewitness Identifications?”
Psychological Science
20 (2009): 122–26.

The good news is that:
Brewer and Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,” 24; Simon,
In Doubt
, 73.

Furthermore, showing multiple photographs:
Innocence Project,
Reevaluating Lineups: Why Witnesses Make Mistakes and How to Reduce the Chance of Misidentification
(New York:

Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University),
http://www.innocenceproject.org/​docs/Eyewitness_ID​_Report.pdf
; Gary L. Wells, “The Psychology of Lineup Identifications,”
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
14 (1983): 89–103.

There is an easy solution here:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 71. The potential drawback of sequential lineups is that, although they have been consistently shown to reduce false identifications, in certain studies they also reduced some correct identifications. Simon,
In Doubt
, 71.

Perhaps the biggest problem:
Rankin, “Innocent Man's Conviction.”

Time is the enemy of eyewitness accuracy:
Brewer and Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,” 24.

Indeed, the most precipitous drop:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 66.

In one study, witnesses who identified a perpetrator:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 66; Tim Valentine, Alan Pickering, and Stephen Darling, “Characteristics of Eyewitness Identification that Predict the Outcome of Real Lineups,”
Applied Cognitive Psychology
17 (2003): 983–84, 988. However, in the period between a month and six months, the proportion of correct identifications seems to level out.

Although it's less common than some:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 69.

One of the basic principles of creating:
Brewer and Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,” 25.

So a lineup may really:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 72. Think about it this way: if someone who had not witnessed the crime could read the description of the perpetrator and easily pick the suspect out of the lineup (or quickly eliminate two of the fillers), the witness's identification is fairly worthless. That seems pretty common sense and, yet, there are numerous cases in which the
suspect was the only person who met the witness's description of having facial hair or pockmarked skin or crossed eyes. Garrett,
Convicting the Innocent
, 58–59.

In White's case, the victim initially:
Garrett, “Introduction,” 672; Garrett,
Convicting the Innocent
, 66.

She said he had short hair:
Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications.”

Flip back to the photograph:
Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications.”

Moreover, his hair is fairly long:
Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications.”

Indeed, the only man who seems:
Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications.”

There is substantial evidence that:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 96.

The process of retrieving memories:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 96.

This unconscious transference can arise:
Brewer and Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,” 25.

In fact, there is some evidence:
Garrett, “Introduction,” 682.

More often the problem arises when:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 66.

Experimental evidence confirms that having:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 66; Amina Memon et al., “Eyewitness Recognition Errors: The Effects of Mugshot Viewing and Choosing in Young and Old Adults,”
Memory and Cognition
30 (2002): 1219–27.

In White's case, the second procedure:
Harvard University Press, “Understanding Eyewitness Misidentifications”; Rankin, “Innocent Man's Conviction.”

What they did not realize is that:
Innocence Project, “John Jerome White.”

The victim may have felt:
Rankin, “Innocent Man's Conviction.”

That is because a witness's level:
Brewer and Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,” 25; Gary L. Wells and Amy L. Bradfield, “ ‘Good You Identified the Suspect': Feedback to Eyewitnesses Distorts Their Reports of the Witnessing Experience,”
Journal of Applied Psychology
83 (1998): 372–73.

When a police officer offers:
Brewer and Wells, “Eyewitness Identification,” 25; Simon,
In Doubt
, 75.

After a witness observes a crime:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 101–02.

Some of this information may come:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 101–02.

There is, of course, the potential:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 101–03.

In one recent study:
Frenda, Nichols, and Loftus, “Current Issues and Advances in Misinformation Research,” 21.

After looking at the photos:
Frenda, Nichols, and Loftus, “Current Issues and Advances in Misinformation Research,” 21.

When participants were asked:
Frenda, Nichols, and Loftus, “Current Issues and Advances in Misinformation Research,” 21.

In another study, two groups:
Elizabeth F. Loftus and John C. Palmer, “Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction: An Example of the Interaction Between Language and Memory,”
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
13 (1974): 585.

When the word
smashed
was used:
Loftus and Palmer, “Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction,” 585.

Participants in the “smashed” group:
Loftus and Palmer, “Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction,” 585.

Young children and the elderly appear:
Frenda, Nichols, and Loftus, “Current Issues and Advances in Misinformation Research,” 21; Simon,
In Doubt
, 114.

Perhaps most shocking is that:
Frenda, Nichols, and Loftus, “Current Issues and Advances in Misinformation Research,” 22.

A number of studies have shown:
Frenda, Nichols, and Loftus, “Current Issues and Advances in Misinformation Research,” 22.

One group of researchers found that:
Sacchi, Agnoli, and Loftus, “Changing History,” 1006–07.

Both verbal and nonverbal cues:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 74.

It seems like good advice and harmless:
Simon,
In Doubt
, 74.

And a simple cough, sigh, or gesture:
Chris Opfer, “The Problem with Police Line-Ups,”
Atlantic
, February 19, 2013,
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/​politics/2013/02​/problem-police-line-ups/4724/
.