Researchers say it is important that the officer presenting the lineup not know details of the case or who police suspect, so as not to consciously or unconsciously influence the witness.
It's also important to specifically warn the witness that the perpetrator may not be among the photos shown or among the suspects presented in a live lineup.
So why would anyone object to a law that would require law enforcement to use the best scientifically proven techniques?
In the last 15 years, 39 Texas convictions were overturned by DNA evidence. All six Harris County convictions overturned hinged upon false eyewitness identifications.
- Law enforcement agencies should document lineups or photo arrays by providing the photos used in a photo array or a photograph of the live lineup as well as all dialogue and witness statements made during the procedure.
- Law enforcement agencies should inform eyewitnesses, prior to viewing a live lineup or photo array that the accused may or may not be in the lineup. Eyewitnesses should not feel compelled to make an identification.
- Lineups and photo arrays should be composed "fairly." The report calls for fillers to be selected based not on their resemblance to the accused but, instead, on their resemblence to the description provided by eyewitnesses.
- The person conducting the lineup or photo array should not know the identity of the accused. Having a "blind" person conduct the lineup reduces the chances of the officer influencing the results of the lineup or photo array.
- Law enforcement agencies should avoid exposing eyewitnesses to multiple viewings of the accused.
- Law enforcement agencies should consider using sequential arrays instead of traditional arrays. In a sequential array, an eyewitness views one individual at a time which prevents the witness from making an identification through process of elimination.
No comments:
Post a Comment