Hi guys! Week 3 was research, research, and more research.In my previous blog post I mentioned how I was going to solidify my outline and then analyze the other causes besides false confessions, that contribute to wrongful convictions. So, some other causes involve junk science, eyewitness error, and snitch testimony. In some criminal cases, scientific results and facts hold great significance in making a determination. To present such evidence at trials, "expert" witnesses are called, and they might be unqualified, or present fraud data in order to sway the jury, the wrong way. Junk science consists of data which is fraudulent, or mishandled. Snitch testimony deals with informants or incentivized witnesses who have a specific motive to testify. They could testify for a few number of reasons: 1) they are paid money 2) will be released from prison. In some cases where DNA or other biological evidences are not possible to show, there is much weight or proof of guilt put onto these witnesses' testimonies, causing the jury to believe them, and wrongfully convict. I found this study which was put forth by the Center of Wrongful Convictions in Chicago, which showed how these witnesses put THIRTY-EIGHT innocent Americans on death row. This study goes into further detail about snitch testimony. Another cause could simply be eyewitness error.This is the GREATEST contributing factor to wrongful convictions. Over SEVENTY percent of convictions that are overturned showed, how influential eyewitnesses are to the cases.
Story of the Day: In 1982, Marvin Anderson was called in to the police station to answer some questions about a rape that had occurred. Marvin did not know that the man who had raped the victim, told her he "had a white girl." Marvin was the only person that the investigating officer knew about that lived with a white girl. The victim was then shown 6 photos of both African American and white men. She picked Marvin. Then shown another lineup she picked Marvin again. Even though he had an alibi, Marvin was convicted of rape, sodomy, abduction, and robbery based mainly off of eyewitness misidentification, and was sentenced to 210 years, After 15 years he was finally exonerated through DNA testing.
Lesson: Eyewitnesses hold a lot more power than they really should.
Hey Laiba! I know you are still conducting research, but do you have any ideas at the moment as to how things such as junk science and snitch testimony could be dealt with?
ReplyDeleteHey! Thanks for reading. So some snitch testimony reform includes: 1) written disclosures of witness compensation and other info for the jury regarding witness credibility 2) cautionary jury instructions telling them about the reliability issues regarding snitch testimony 3) the testimony that the snitch gives must be corroborated. Hopefully this answers your question! I am not so sure about junk science as yet, because there are no solid reforms yet.
DeleteHey! Thanks for reading. So some snitch testimony reform includes: 1) written disclosures of witness compensation and other info for the jury regarding witness credibility 2) cautionary jury instructions telling them about the reliability issues regarding snitch testimony 3) the testimony that the snitch gives must be corroborated. Hopefully this answers your question! I am not so sure about junk science as yet, because there are no solid reforms yet.
DeleteHi Laiba! Do you think that the advent of improved technology could help to prevent situations like this from happening? I was just curious as to your opinion on the idea.
ReplyDeleteHey Ani! Thanks for reading. Technology is such a powerful tool as I am sure that you already know. However, in particular cases like this I don't really know how technology would help. Great databases for matching DNA already exist, and research labs and things like that are top-notch. Right now the main exoneration method is through DNA. Also about the prevention question, most trials and things like that are based on eyewitness accounts and things like that, not really technology so I doubt that the advent of technology would help prevention but it might help exoneration. Hope that answers your question!
DeleteHey Ani! Thanks for reading. Technology is such a powerful tool as I am sure that you already know. However, in particular cases like this I don't really know how technology would help. Great databases for matching DNA already exist, and research labs and things like that are top-notch. Right now the main exoneration method is through DNA. Also about the prevention question, most trials and things like that are based on eyewitness accounts and things like that, not really technology so I doubt that the advent of technology would help prevention but it might help exoneration. Hope that answers your question!
Delete