eyewitness

From Fraser’s talking, I strongly agree his concern about the eyewitness identification testimony. I agree with Fraser that eyewitness testimonies are not reliable in some cases because “eyewitness testimony can be critiqued on several grounds, having impaired perception, having impaired memory, having inconsistent testimony, having bias or prejudice, and not having a reputation for telling the truth.” Even eyewitness testimony from honest people can sent innocent people in jail. Therefore, even if none of these characteristics apply, that does not mean that the testimony is credible. Human’s memory is partial complete and is always reconstructed. All our memories are reconstructed memories. They are the product of what we originally experienced and everything that’s happened afterwards.
Also, scientific plays important role when identify testimony in a criminal case. Not just based on eyewitness testimony, but also capable of analyze the evidence and atmosphere in order to find out a real crime. Scott Fraser said, “When it comes to witnesses in criminal trials, the accuracy of human memory can mean the difference between life and death.” False eyewitness testimony from sincere people can put innocent people in jail, but it also can free the criminals.
In conclusion, race also plays important role in eyewitness testimony. Eyewitnesses are more likely to misidentify people of a different race, and are less likely to misidentify people of their own race. Various hypotheses have been tested to explain this deficiency in identification accuracy, including any racial animosity on the part of the viewer, and exposure level to the other race in question. -What role do you think race plays in eyewitness testimony? having bias or prejudice
One of the most-studied topics in this area is the cross-racial identification, namely when the witness and the perpetrator are of different races. A recent meta-analysis of 25 years of research shows a definitive, statistically