Identification Procedures Line Ups and Show Ups
Identification Procedures Line Ups and
Police lineups have been used for decades in criminal cases. The witnesses who seen the criminal can look at a line up and pick out the person he had seen when a crime was committed. This process has been used to help identify and charge an individual with a crime. A police lineup may involve real people or may be photographs of individuals. Usually, the lineups will have the person who committed the crime, and approximately five fill in people to choose from.
There is a process that needs to be followed when police conduct a line up for witnesses to choose from. There are instructions given to the witness before the lineup process begins. The witnesses is told that the individual who they saw commit a crime may be in the lineup and they may not be in the lineup. This helps to assure the identification that the witnesses has saw of the person, and reduces risk of the witnesses picking someone who may not be the perpetrator. “A “may or may not be present” instruction decreased mistaken identification rates in lineups where the suspect was not present” .
The second process for a pre-lineup is to be careful selecting individuals who are fillers for the lineup. It is essential to not pick people whose characteristics are opposite of the perpetrator in the lineup. The reason is that if fillers don’t have the same characteristics and features of the criminal then the criminal is more likely to stick out in the lineup. This could lead to selective persuasion when the witness has to pick out the person they saw committing the crime. When police get ready for a lineup process they will pick people who have similar features of the criminal to help eliminate persuasive decisions when witnesses need to identify an individual.
Police also need to take into consideration the race, and age of the witness. If a perpetrator is present during the lineup selection then the process usually has a positive result. If the perpetrator is not present in the lineup then the witness who may be elderly you’re a child may mistake another person as the perpetrator. Usually a witness can identify a perpetrator more likely if they are the same race as the witness. If the perpetrator is of a different race than the witness sometimes it is harder to identify the individual in a lineup. This should be taken into consideration when police are preparing the lineup for the witness.
The last scenario that police need to consider when preparing a lineup for a witness is if a weapon was involved in the crime. When a weapon is involved in a crime this can decrease the witness memory of the perpetrator because people tend to focus more on the weapon than the criminal at the time the incident is occurring.
Another procedure that can be used for a witness to pick a person out who has committed a crimes is a show-up. A show up is different than a lineup or photo selection. A show up is where a witness looks at one individual and decides whether that person was the perpetrator. There is no fillers in this process, but only the perpetrator that police think may have committed the crime. The witness shows up at the police station and takes a look at the one individual, and then makes the conclusion of whether that person had committed the criminal act of violence.
A show up is not the most reliable way to witness a perpetrator in a crime. The process of show-up has led to many misleading convictions, and has sent many innocent people to prison for a crime they had no ties too. Many courts won’t allow this type of witness selection because it is not accurate or reliable. “Despite this serious issue, most of the states follow the Supreme Court’s framework for deciding whether show-up evidence is allowed at trial” .
If an individual is asked to be present in a lineup it is legal to have counsel present. The reason for this is if the police do not have reason for the defendant to be in the lineup then the lawyer can protect the rights of the defendant. If the lawyers feels the reason for the lineup is necessary then the lawyer can be present to make sure the procedure is done accurately and fair to the defendant. “The defendant does have the right to counsel present if and when a lineup takes place” . If police deny the defendant the right to counsel this would be a violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights.
If the lineup is rigged and the fillers do not have similar characteristics this would also violate the constitutional rights of the defendant. If persuasion or selective identification occurs during a lineup this would also violate the defendant’s constitutional rights of the Sixth Amendment. The defendant always has rights from time of person of interest, to arrest, and trial. IF the defendant is denied a fair and just process then the rights of that individual guilty or not will have been violated.
The defendant who is subject to a show up also has rights. The right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment. The fourteenth Amendment also give defendants the right to confront the person who is accusing them. This can also be true for show up procedure and a lineup process.. If a witness shows up and points the finger at the defendant that he is guilty then the defendant has the right to confront the accuser. The right to a fair and just trial is also constitutionally affirmative in the dependent being chosen in a show up. There needs to be guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to convict the defendant. Other evidence may be needed in addition to the witness picking the defendant in a show up. Having legal counsel present will ensure the defendant’s constitutional rights are not violated or mislead during the process of arrest through trial.
When police have scheduled a lineup or show up for a witness to choose a perpetrator there are other ways to help reduce misconception and wrongful conviction. The reason the criminal justice system is finding new ways to ensure accuracy of eye witness identification is to help reduce the correct person is convicted and sentenced.
System variables have come about to help police and detectives ensure accurate eye witness detection. System variables include “memory evidence collection” include the way police question witnesses. Another form of memory evidence collection is identifiable process.
These two techniques can help reduce misinterpretation of the witness. The officer may rearrange questions in a manner that will help ensure the witness is accurate on the details of the crime and the perpetrator who committed the crime. The officer may ask the same questions but in a different format to ensure the witness has a positive recollection of the facts as they had occurred.
An officer who is conducting the questioning of the witness will need to be trained in these techniques to ensure the accuracy of the questions and the answers of the witness. These types of scenarios must ensure the witness has positive recollection of the events without the interviewer corrupting or contaminating the information gathered during questioning.
Another popular method being used in “witness recollection of memory is Cognitive Interview” process. The type of interview method is used to enhance the memory and recall important facts and details. This process is has a positive result in witnesses describing characteristics of criminal and perpetrators. This process includes building rapport with the witness and open ended questions. Officers can give the witness the opportunity to tell everything they know, and give descriptive information that police need to solve a crime. This evidence can be crucial when a lineup is needed.
The increase in crime and case overload in the Judicial System will hinder the prosecution of wrongful convictions. The more cases that police and investigators have to handle could lead to less accuracy of a conviction. The more study and knowledge that is given to eye witness identification will help decrease the likelihood an innocent person goes to prison for a crime that he did not commit. Every case should be taken seriously, and evidence including witness testimony should be accurate and substantial.
There will always be barriers in criminal court proceedings. The reason is no one is perfect. Mistakes will happen and continue to happen each and every day no matter how much advancement in process is taken. One option that may help in decreasing barriers in eye witness and evidence would be to have a second set of eyes review the evidence before proceeding. This would ensure double accuracy of the case including witness statements to assist with convicting the correct person and not an innocent individual. IF a person’s life may be spent in prison then another person should review the case without prejudice to ensure there is an accurate account of evidence to ensure the proper conviction of the perpetrator.
Barriers that may happen is misconception, and recollection of facts. There is no way to eliminate this issue due to humanistic error, but finding ways to ensure more effective results will be very helpful. The expansion of technology and methods may assist in deterring from the innocent being convicted, and the guilty being free. The main barrier in witness identification is that no matter what steps are taken to improve the detection of perpetrators a lineup there will always be misconceptions. The conviction based on eye witness identification should not be enough to make a case. Memories are misinterpreted, and recollection is not 100% effective.
Reference
Dysart, J. (2013). Police Lineup . Constitutional Rights, 1-3.
Easton, J. (2010). Reforming the Law on Show-up Identifications. Journal of Criminal Law, 1-35.
Fisher, R. (2016). Improving Eye Witness Accounts. Law Enforcement , 1-4.
Gronlound, S. (2011). Eyewitness Identification. Lineup Procedures, 1-25.
Schutser, B. (2014). Police Lineups. National Institute of Justice, 1-6.
