Identification Procedures Quiz

27 years

288

165

154

36

163

34%

1. Mugshot searches
2. Showups
3. Line-ups / ID parades
4. Voice and other non-facial Identifications

Facial composites are constructed based on a witness description.

Photo lineups are the most common type of identification procedure in NSW and most US states.

Cutler et al (1994) concluded that photospreads produced similar performance levels to live and video lineups.

In the US, lineups typically have 6 people.

Wells et al (1994) stated that there is no threshold number below which the dangers of false ID are significant and above which they are not.

The functional size of a lineup refers to the number of individuals who match the description of the perpetrator. For example, if a lineup contains 5 people but only one matches the description, the functional size is 1.

Identification evidence is considered dangerous because it is very convincing to jurors, leading them to convict regardless of other evidence. Research shows that identification evidence is often inaccurate, making eyewitnesses sincere, confident, convincing, and yet wrong.

Two ways we know that eyewitness identification is often inaccurate are through case studies of wrongful convictions and empirical studies of identification performance.

The purpose of DNA analysis in criminal investigations is to link a person to a crime with a high degree of certainty and to prove the innocence of convicted inmates.

The Innocence Project has played a significant role in DNA exoneration cases.

One example of a DNA exoneration case is that of Kirk Bloodsworth, who was convicted based on identification by five eyewitnesses, sentenced to death, and later released after serving nine years, two of which were on death row.

As of July 2021, there have been 375 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States.

Exonerations through DNA have been won in 37 states.

a) When there is a greater emphasis on avoiding false identifications than on convicting the guilty

Sequential lineups merely shift bias but do not increase sensitivity

Suspect identified in 25% of cases (same for Seq and Sim), but Seq resulted in fewer identifications of foils (11% vs 18%)

1. Need for preliminary witness interviews, 2) Evidence based suspicion prior to ID, 3) Avoid repeat ID procedures with same witness, 4) Avoid show-ups, 5) Video record procedures

Initial, uncontaminated memory tests using fair lineups, with no lineup administrator influence, and with an immediate confidence statement

Identifying an innocent person from a lineup because they are familiar

People are better able to recognize individuals of the same 'race' than individuals of a different race

The effect was not large enough to account for racial disparities in wrongful conviction data, and differences in evidence against suspects may play a greater role

Impact of system variables