DISCUSSION 5 (2 RESPONSES)
Discussion 5: Evidence Identification
Amanda: Eyewitness identification is not the ‘nail in the coffin’ piece of evidence most people would think because of it is highly subjective. There is a multitude of intangibles that need be considered when confronted with an eyewitness identification. People have prejudices hidden below the surface that play out on their everyday actions that they do not control or realize. Older people may have prejudices against teens or children or rich versus poor or a race against another race. You may not know what kind of day the person providing the eyewitness testimony had, whether they were upset or tired. Additionally, people who see certain actions may not be able to hear the audio that is associated with what took place, they do not know the underlying conditions that may exist within the concept of the subjective action. Ten people could provide observations of exactly the same thing and there will not be ten of the same observations. This is not to say that if there are multiple eyewitnesses that can corroborate each other their value should be diminished. However the most substantiating evidence that can be provided, such as DNA, if applicable, should be used. This will only strengthen any eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony, if available, should be used as part of the evidentiary file and not allowed to stand alone if at all possible.
Beverly: Handwriting analysis is a useful tool when a part of a volume of compiled evidence. Even as a piece of the puzzle, care must be taken when evaluating handwriting as evidence. There are so many factors that can affect the handwriting of an individual that the person in charge of analyzing it must be careful to gather an assortment of samples or exemplars of the writing samples. There are many factors to be considered when accumulating exemplars. Writing styles can be controlled if the subject focuses on how the writing is being done. It will also differ if being hurried or if the subject is writing for the first time in a while. Furthermore, handwriting can be copied if practiced enough, so it is beneficial to have more than one type of exemplar so to look at a variety of samples when comparing them to the questioned document. When utilizing evidence the more documentation used to authenticate the questioned document the higher the percentages of having a secure genuine piece of the evidentiary puzzle. As potentially damning as a handwriting sample could be, there are intangibles such as instrument type that can weaken the strength of the analysis as evidence. If enough samples are collected every person has certain quirks within their handwriting styles that give handwriting analysis influence, but that is all it should be in evaluating evidence, a fragment and not an over the edge, damning portion.
