Psychological issues in eyewitness identify - MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Psychological issues in eyewitness identification. Answer: Both eye witness testimony and DNA evidence have both advantages and disadvantages. They are both prone to errors that can lead to wrongful conviction. Both DNA evidence and eye witness are never foolproof. DNA evidence is only one amongst many types of evidences jurors need to consider when determining a case. TV shows like CSI have promoted forensic science to a level that certain jurors have impracticable expectations of analysis of DNA. Thus, according DNA supreme weight than other evidences (Buckleton, Bright and Taylor 2016). Whereas maintaining the DNA databanks could assist police in identifying criminals, it further poses ethical dilemmas where samples are kept by authorities from individuals yet to be accused in any crime (Balding and Steele 2015). DNA quests, maneuvers whereby officers gather samples from a many individuals in different geographic areas to identify a perpetrator, have remained contentious. However, DNA profiling has a great advantage that hinges DNAs specificity. Moreover, comparatively minute DNAs quantities at a crime scene is able to yield adequate material that can be properly analyzed. Forensic scientists characteristically liken a minimum of thirteen DNA markers in 2 samples. The likelihood that any given 2 people might have similar profiles remains estimated to being under 1/10 billion. Thus, where specimens remain gathered appropriately and correct procedure is undertaken, DNA profiling proves tremendously accurate and reliable means of comparing the DNA of a suspect with the specimen gathered at crime scene. Thus, as a member of juror, before considering the reliability of DNA evidence, it will always be imperative for me to remember that DNA analysis, similar to any other forensic science technique, stays susceptible to human error. For example, contamination in the course of specimen gathering or analysis is able to dramatically reduce DNA reliability and accuracy. Generally, DNA evidence remains increasingly valuable in isolating suspects than in proving guilt. Conversely, eye witness testimony is only credible under certain circumstance and science urges jurors to cautious in relying on accounts of eyewitness because it remains indecisive, and mostly, surprisingly imprecise. One reason why eye witness is unreliable is that since people with some psychological disorders like antisocial personality disorder alongside substance dependence, remain at increased risk for criminal involvement, eyewitnesses have heightened likelihood for false identification of this group. Even though many jurors have placed heavy weight on eyewitness testimony when deciding whether one is guilty, most of these cases have been overturned by DNA evidence and subsequently exonerated (Sporer, Malpass and Khnken 2014). Thus, as a member of a juror, I will never uncritically accept eyewitness reports since they are prone to many factors that bias these reports. Thus, unlike other jurors who incline towards putting supreme weight to eyewitnesses testimony reporting that they remained very certain regarding respective identifications, I will lean towards studies that have shown that extremely confident eyewitness remain solely usually somewhat more accurate- and occasionally no more so- as opposed to less confident ones. In my view, therefore, DNA evidence is more reliable than eyewitness testimony because of the many instance in which convicts have been exonerated using DNA due to wrongful conviction due to false identification of the eyewitness. Sources of error DNA evidence source of error may originate from cross-contamination of sample. The crime scene evidence is cleaned up which sometime destroy the evidence during testing. Retesting must therefore be done in order to obtain accurate result from the study sample. Another potential error that may occur is misinterpretation of sample results. The laboratory is prone of assigning or mistyping evidentiary samples. If the sample is mistakenly assigned then this will led to false incrimination (Gill 2014). The third cause of error in DNA matches is in case there is mislabelling of samples. The correct way of finding the actual error is when the retest of the sample from original source is performed. However, this procedure is always unavailable hence rarely used. One source of error in eye witness is wrongful identification. This results from reconstruction of memory whereby questioning by a lawyer can change the testimony of the witness as fragments of memory could mistakenly be combined with info provided by lawyer culminating in inaccurate recall. Also, the eyewitness could be wrongly selected by police and hence give wrong eyewitness testimony. Yes, I think these questions would change if I were not studying science. It is the background I have in forensic science, especially DNA evidence and analysis that I have got to learn the false that are attached to eyewitness identification (Buckleton, Bright and Taylor 2016). Before, I studied science, I trusted eyewitness, but I have come to realize that science tells jurors never to rely on fickle and always inaccurate eyewitness. This is because science has disapproved my initial misconception that memory works like a video recorder. However, I have come to understand that memory are reconstructed instead of played back every time eyewitness recall them. This leaves eyewitness reports at a disadvantage than DNA because even cross-examination by the lawyer can change the testimony of the witness as fragments of memory could unknowingly be merged with info provided by examiner leading to recall inaccuracy (Roberts 2014). References Balding, D.J. and Steele, C.D., 2015.Weight-of-evidence for Forensic DNA Profiles. John Wiley Sons. Buckleton, J.S., Bright, J.A. and Taylor, D. eds., 2016.Forensic DNA evidence interpretation. CRC press. Gill, P., 2014.Misleading DNA evidence: reasons for miscarriages of justice. Elsevier. Roberts, N., 2014. The Reliability of Eyewitness Testimony. Sporer, S.L., Malpass, R.S. and Khnken, G. eds., 2014.Psychological issues in eyewitness identification. Psychology Press. Toglia, M.P., Read, J.D., Ross, D.F. and Lindsay, R.C. eds., 2017.The handbook of eyewitness psychology: Volume I: Memory for events. Psychology Press.