eyewitness testimony is the worst example of evidence. So many people can see the same thing and report different results. Forensic and video is the best way to go. Body cameras should be considered for all patrol officers.
So true - I'm sure there are people sitting in Prison because an eyewitness Id'd them and they were wrong.
Repetition is how you enforce memory. Seeing something once for a few seconds is very unreliable and many times flat out wrong.
How many of you dream? After waking, are not most of the details gone after a few minutes? Unless you were to write them down within
a minute, I'll bet most of them would be gone. And I doubt that ANYONE wrote down what happened at that shooting and were relying on what
happened from memory. Days after it happened too. Memory fades with time.
I've seen a documentary on this subject. They set up a counter and a client walked up and the man at the counter said Oh let me get that form and
then ducked down and then another man popped up with the form and over 80% did not realize that the man switched. They did many variations of
that and every time the overwhelming majority failed to notice. There are other studies that have been done too, but I can't remember them.
How many of you walk into another room and can't remember why you came to the other room? Anyone? Because that is fairly normal.
No, it doesn't mean your on the road to dementia.
If someone tells you there phone # and there is nothing to write on or with and no electronic devices, the average person would need to
hear it or say it a number of times before it might stick. Point being that one time probably isn't going to do it. So how can seeing something once,
that happens really fast, stick?
In many Sports, how often do they do replays? And the second or third time, do you see something different then you did the first time?
At least more clearly then you did the first time? But in real life we don't get instant replays, do we? When there is no video it's someones word
against someone else's word and that's where the problems start.
Of course with us knowing that memory is not usually 100% in anyone, what choice do judges and jury's have but to use what has been given to them?
Now this is a little off base but there is another example of right and wrong.
I remember Pheasant hunting one time and a group of us had just pulled up to a field and started getting our gear out.
As we were just about ready to step into the field I said Stop there is a pheasant right there. My friend said where? I said right there in some grass
along the edge of the field. I said it's right there pointing to it. He again said where? Right there? He said there isn't any pheasant there. I said yes there is.
I said OK get ready to shoot. I walked towards it and it flew up and away.
Point here is because I'm colorblind I could see the bird and no one else could. So by most standards everyone else would say I was lying. But the truth that
I saw through my eyes was not visible to them.
Back to the case, this just proves that not everyone sees the exact same thing even when they are looking at the exact same thing.
Add speed and a short window of time and people are going to vary a lot on what actually happened, very few being accurate.
They say that in NYC there is basically no place on the street that you can go without being video taped. So we are the generation that is
caught in the beginnings of making the truth be known to all via video in every major city in the USA. Someday I believe that crime will be reduced
as there will be almost no way to commit a crime without being caught. I mean lets face it - don't most criminals think that they will somehow get away
with the crime they are planning to commit? Don't Bank robbers have big dreams of what they are going to do with all the money they get from a heist?
Protect yourself - buy a video camera and use it.