The Importance Of Eyewitness Testimonies

Although, eye witness testimonies construct a fundamental basis in criminal or civil investigations they are falsifiable and therefore shouldn’t exclusively determine a verdict. When used as sole evidence, if the testimony is remotely questionable or a key word such as “resembled” is used, more evidence is needed to solidify the situation. In the case Scott Fraser speaks of, only eye witness testimonies were being used to convict the suspect. There was no DNA evidence, no murder weapon, and a description of the vehicle was not proved. Fraser outlined key components that discredited the witnesses with his expertise in “human night vision” proving that the witness’s memories were reconstructive with the suspect in mind. The power of persuasion over the human memory and simple suggestion is what makes it constructive therefore, inadmissible.
It already has brought to justice over 280 cases of wrongful conviction, 3 fourths out the cases which eye witness testimonies were the only evidence. Eye witnesses have good intentions but, they aren’t aware that their original memory can be distorted. This information needs to be kept in mind in these situation because the negative ramification could potentially be disastrous, like in the case of Steve Titus. The injustice consumed his like and ultimately resulted in his death. Also, all of those that were released through the work of the innocence project who spent countless years in prison that probably drove them insane and cause to question the judicial system and the overall meaning of the rest of their life. So, when posed with the questionability of an eye witness and the negative ramification, no, eye witness testimonies should not be admissible in