My Photo

PRACDL Blog Contributors

  • Tom Lincoln
    PRACDL Board Member
  • Rachel Brill
    PRACDL Board Member
  • Jorge E. Vega-Pacheco
    PRACDL Board Member
  • Linda Backiel
    PRACDL President

Email

PRACDL Board

  • Linda Backiel
    President
  • Mariángela Tirado-Vales
    Vice President
  • Jason González-Delgado
    Secretary
  • Jorge E. Rivera-Ortíz
    Treasurer
  • Rachel Brill
    Board Member
  • Joseph C. Laws, Jr.
    Fed. Pub. Defender - Board Member
  • Thomas R. Lincoln
    Board Member
  • Olga M. Shepard de Mari
    Board Member
  • Jorge E. Vega-Pacheco
    Board Member

Past Presidents

  • Joseph C. Laws, Jr.
  • Jorge L. Arroyo Alejandro
  • María H. Sandoval Ochoa
  • Thomas R. Lincoln San Juan
  • Mariángela Tirado-Vales

PRACDL By Laws

Legal Guide for Bloggers


  • Bloggers' Rights at EFF

USLaw.com Blog Network


  • lawyer blogs

CC License

Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 11/2004

December 23, 2004

Eyewitness Identification Reform

Nacdl_logo_2CrimProf Blog reports here on a column in the December issue of The Champion by NACDL President Barry Scheck on changes on the horizon that will go a long way towards avoiding mistaken eyewitness identifications.

"Soon, the single greatest cause of the conviction of the innocent -- mistaken eyewitness identification -- will be significantly redressed by a series of historic reforms: We will see photo arrays and lineups conducted by a blinded examiner (the person running the procedure doesn't know the identity of the suspect); proper admonitions to witnesses that the real perpetrator may not be present; proper selection of fillers so they meet the description of the perpetrator, not the suspect; confidence statements from witnesses at the time of identification in their own words; and sequential presentation at identification procedures with an adequate number of fillers (at least five). Based on strong scientific proof that these reforms substantially reduce error and increase the capacity of police to find the real assailant, courts, legislatures, and prosecutors will adopt them because it's just good law enforcement. But they will also act because there is a constitutional imperative at work: The heart of the Supreme Court's due process jurisprudence in this area is to prohibit systemic practices that unnecessarily increase error.

These reforms will move on three different tracks simultaneously. On one track, state and federal courts will reverse and revise Manson v. Braithwaite, instructing juries that failure to follow procedures that demonstrably reduce error must be held against the prosecution. Similarly, courts at pre-trial hearings will consider expert testimony and assess the taint from improper suggestiveness in light of new scientific evidence. On a second track, where trains are already in motion, police and prosecutors will voluntarily implement these reforms, following the lead of New Jersey, North Carolina, Minneapolis, Boston, Santa Clara (Calif.), and Northhampton (Mass.). And finally, state legislatures and Congress will follow the lead of Illinois, as well as suggestions from the American Bar Association, and enact bills funding pilot projects, research, and training."

This is all very good news indeed.

Since 1991


  • NACDL

PRACDL Group Listserv