How Do Bystanders Use Eyewitnesses To Proven Guilty?

In our judicial system, a person should be “innocent until proven guilty” and will usually only be acquitted or prosecuted when it is proven beyond reasonable doubt, that he or she is innocent or guilty. Lawyers, on either side, will need to build a case for or against their client and will use testimony from eyewitnesses to do so.
The merits of using eyewitnesses firsthand accounts are manifold. Firstly, we can figure out the actual sequence of events. By interviewing different people that were eyewitnesses of an occurrence, we can determine how the event actually happened and put together a timeline and even possibly, a motive. In addition, by interviewing bystanders immediately following an event, the details are more memorable in their minds and more reliable to be true. Thirdly, as the saying goes “seeing is believing”. If one actually saw the occurrence then this is true, live evidence that the event really happened and who is responsible for doing it (Apecsecadmin, 2014).
As time passes, people tend to forget details and certain events. Even those events that were originally crystal clear, will naturally fade with time. Also, a person’s bias – how he or she views what happened based on past experiences and upbringing, will affect how the person will relay what occurred. Even if the person is only stating facts, the bias will be present in the testimony. Finally, when a traumatic event occurs, a person’s senses are heightened, their adrenaline starts pumping and hence, the brain then naturally, does not commit everything to memory – because it is concentrating on the traumatic event and the testimony will be lacking. (Apecsecadmin, 2014). Anxiety and stress after an incident can also lead to focusing on certain details and forgetting others. We sometimes fill in missing details based on what we think makes sense and not necessarily by what actually happened (McLeod,