The Expert Eyewitness: Case Study
Psychology in the Court Room
The Expert Witness
“How reliable is eyewitness testimony”
On the 28th of September 1999, a building society in West Bromwich was robbed by a man brandishing a gun. He had approached the cashier desk and pushed aside a customer and then produced a gun. He ordered the three customers in the bank to lie on the floor. He then pointed the gun in the face of the cashier and told her to fill the bag with money. In doing so, she managed to raise the silent alarm alerting the police. After her compliance, the robber instructed her to also lie on the floor behind the desk. He warned the customers not to move before shooting his gun at the ceiling and running out.
The four witnesses were then interviewed as a …show more content…
This theory suggests that we are only able to take in a certain amount of information at the scene of a crime or incident. At a later date when we are asked to provide greater detail, we rely on past experience (schemas) and prejudices (stereotypes) to fill in the gaps. We use expectations to reconstruct our memory. One experiment conducted by Bartlett in 1932 called ‘War of the ghosts’ portrayed a great example of the way people use stereotypes and schemas. Bartlett got participants to read a native North American folk tale, then repeat the story to another person in turn who repeated it and so on. By the time the last person had repeated the story back they had shortened it by three quarters and westernised the details for example, seal clubbing was changed to …show more content…
When also presented with an eyewitness testimony, the guilty verdict dramatically changed to 72%. This demonstrates the powerful effect of an eyewitness testimony. More strikingly, when the participants were informed that the eyewitness was short-sighted, he was not wearing his glasses at the time of the offence, and he could not have seen the robber’s face from where he was standing, 68% still gave a guilty verdict, Stuwart(2013).
This demonstrates the shocking strengths that an eyewitness testimony bares on each case.
Upon evaluation of this case, it would seem that the conviction to ‘send a message to other potential criminals’, may have been in haste.
The problem with this case not only lies with unreliable eyewitness testimony’s but the conduct shown by the police throughout. From group interviews, leading questions and photographs to prompting from the prosecution lawyers prior to the trial.
The conviction of James Taylor in this case, seems to be more about making an example of someone in order to set a precedent for others thinking of committing a similar crime, rather than on a case which is based purely on facts and forensic evidence, in which this case had
The Expert Witness
“How reliable is eyewitness testimony”
On the 28th of September 1999, a building society in West Bromwich was robbed by a man brandishing a gun. He had approached the cashier desk and pushed aside a customer and then produced a gun. He ordered the three customers in the bank to lie on the floor. He then pointed the gun in the face of the cashier and told her to fill the bag with money. In doing so, she managed to raise the silent alarm alerting the police. After her compliance, the robber instructed her to also lie on the floor behind the desk. He warned the customers not to move before shooting his gun at the ceiling and running out.
The four witnesses were then interviewed as a …show more content…
This theory suggests that we are only able to take in a certain amount of information at the scene of a crime or incident. At a later date when we are asked to provide greater detail, we rely on past experience (schemas) and prejudices (stereotypes) to fill in the gaps. We use expectations to reconstruct our memory. One experiment conducted by Bartlett in 1932 called ‘War of the ghosts’ portrayed a great example of the way people use stereotypes and schemas. Bartlett got participants to read a native North American folk tale, then repeat the story to another person in turn who repeated it and so on. By the time the last person had repeated the story back they had shortened it by three quarters and westernised the details for example, seal clubbing was changed to …show more content…
When also presented with an eyewitness testimony, the guilty verdict dramatically changed to 72%. This demonstrates the powerful effect of an eyewitness testimony. More strikingly, when the participants were informed that the eyewitness was short-sighted, he was not wearing his glasses at the time of the offence, and he could not have seen the robber’s face from where he was standing, 68% still gave a guilty verdict, Stuwart(2013).
This demonstrates the shocking strengths that an eyewitness testimony bares on each case.
Upon evaluation of this case, it would seem that the conviction to ‘send a message to other potential criminals’, may have been in haste.
The problem with this case not only lies with unreliable eyewitness testimony’s but the conduct shown by the police throughout. From group interviews, leading questions and photographs to prompting from the prosecution lawyers prior to the trial.
The conviction of James Taylor in this case, seems to be more about making an example of someone in order to set a precedent for others thinking of committing a similar crime, rather than on a case which is based purely on facts and forensic evidence, in which this case had