Eyewitness Testimony (Definitivo)

EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY
1. little introduction with definition as legal term and in the concrete case of italian cpp;
2. difference between eyewitness testimony (verbal account) and eyewitness evidence (broad term);
3. variables that can affect the report;
4. how can an eyewitness identify a perpetrator?
first slide: introduction

“It is … inevitable that what a witness says in court will be a subjective and incomplete version of
‘the truth’ interspersed with small portions of fiction.” While a significant number of psychologists
concur with Ainsworth’s observation, eyewitness testimony continues to be a cornerstone of evidence
in both civil and criminal cases (1). Nevertheless, with advancements in science and technology,
along with the emergence of new data, some cases are now being re-examined to reassess the
reliability—and, by extension, the evidentiary value—of such documents.
Before delving deeper, it is useful to revisit the definition of eyewitness: is a legal term that refers to
the account a bystander or victim gives in the courtroom - and therefore under oath (2) - or during the
interrogation, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under
investigation. According to the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure, a witness “shall be questioned on
the facts which are referred to as evidence”. It established that anyone can be a witness, even children
under the age of fourteen, but the obligation to tell the truth during the trial is provided only for people
over the age of fourteen. Nevertheless, the scientific literature refutes this statement.
In fact, scientific studies conducted by Varendonck have demonstrated that children's eyewitness
accounts are often unreliable, as they tend to shape their responses based not on memory but on
elements contained in the questions posed by authoritative figures. The propensity of an individual to
yield to such suggestions is known as interrogative suggestibility. This phenomenon is particularly
prevalent among children, who are easily influenced and vulnerable, leading to instances of
compliance.
second slide: difference between the eyewitness testimony and eyewitness evidence
In addition to the previously discussed term "eyewitness testimony," there is also "eyewitness
evidence." This broader term encompasses all elements that support the witness’s statement, such as
geolocation data, chats and messages, visible injuries, and any other relevant items that can be used as
a proof to strengthen, to endorse the credibility of evidence or tesitmony.
While such testimony can be corroborated by external evidence, it may also be subject to
impeachment. In judicial proceedings, a protocol/ method may be undertaken to discredit the witness's
credibility, thereby questioning the reliability of their account. This often involves highlighting
contradictions or inconsistencies that may indicate an inability to accurately recount the facts.
Moreover, through the use of leading questions, a witness may respond in a way that reflects the
feedback of an authoritative figure rather than objective recall of the event.
Impeachment of a witness refers to the process of discrediting or undermining the credibility of a witness during
a trial, by presenting evidence or asking questions that contradict their testimony or reveal a bias, inconsistency,
or falsehood in their statements. It is a common strategy used by attorneys to challenge the veracity of a witness
and to cast doubt on the reliability of their testimony.
From a political perspective, impeachment is the procedure whereby a legislative body or other duly authorized
tribunal initiates formal charges against a public official on grounds of alleged misconduct. This process is
distinctive in that it encompasses both political and legal aspects.
third slide: the variables which can play a role in testimony

To undermine the credibility of a witness’s testimony in court, the process involves emphasizing
specific factors or inconsistencies that may indicate inaccuracies in their account. This can include
pointing out contradictions in the witness’s statements, inconsistencies with other evidence, signs of
suggestibility, or biases. Additionally, factors such as the witness’s level of perception at the time of
the event, emotional state, and the influence of external information can be scrutinized to cast doubt
on the reliability of their testimony. This method of challenging testimony aims to establish
reasonable grounds for questioning its accuracy and reliability. In particular:
Own-race bias, also known as the cross-race effect, refers to the tendency for individuals to better
recognize faces of their own race than those of a different race, potentially leading to
misidentification. Stress and anxiety can also impact the accuracy of a witness’s memory, as extreme
stress, especially in traumatic circumstances, tends to distort perception and weaken recall.
The weapon-focus effect describes how the presence of a weapon can draw attention away from other
details, particularly the perpetrator’s appearance, leading to decreased accuracy in suspect
identification. Disguises and altered appearances, such as hats or masks, similarly hinder accurate
recognition by obscuring identifying features that a witness would otherwise rely on.
Exposure duration, or the amount of time a witness has to observe the event or individual, plays a
crucial role in memory reliability, with shorter durations often resulting in less accurate recall. If the
witness was intoxicated due to alcohol or drugs during the event, their ability to accurately perceive
and remember details may be compromised, as intoxication can impair cognitive functions like
attention and perception.
Additionally, post-event information or exposure to suggestive questions can distort a witness's

memory, leading to memory contamination. Witnesses are often highly susceptible to external
influences, which can result in incorporating unobserved details. Lastly, the time delay between the
event and testimony may increase the risk of inaccurate recall, as memory decay sets in over time,
fading or distorting details.
Each of these variables highlights the need for courts to carefully evaluate the reliability of eyewitness
testimony, given the potential impact on accuracy.
fourth slide: identify the perpetrator

The primary purpose of witness testimony is to provide as much information as possible about the
incident and the identity of the alleged perpetrator. After addressing the potential issues associated
with obtaining testimony, it becomes essential to examine how such evidence can effectively aid in
identifying the responsible individual. Two primary tools assist in this identification process: the
line-up and the mugshot or photo array, both of which are visual identification methods that actively
involve the witness.
The line-up, or live identification procedure, presents the witness with a group of individuals, among
whom the suspect is included alongside others with similar physical characteristics. The witness is
then asked to identify the perpetrator without external influence, in conditions that ensure impartiality
and limit the risk of bias. The procedure often requires a double-blind method, whereby the
administrator is unaware of the suspect's identity, to minimize any implicit influence that might lead to
misidentification.
The photo array, also known as a mugshot lineup, involves presenting a series of photographs,
including that of the suspect, to the witness for identification. The array must feature individuals
resembling the suspect in terms of physical attributes and pose. This technique allows more flexibility
in terms of timing and logistics than an in-person line-up, but like all identification methods, it carries
the risk of bias and thus demands strict procedural safeguards to prevent false identification.
Both identification methods are governed by legal standards and protocols designed to ensure the
integrity and reliability of the process. Misidentification poses severe risks to the judicial process and
the accused's rights, as it is among the most common causes of wrongful convictions. Therefore, it is
critical that administrators adhere to principles of proportionality and appropriateness, ensuring each
technique is executed with the utmost respect for procedural rights and accuracy in the results.

Eyewitness Testimony (Definitivo)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eyewitness Testimony (Definitivo)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eyewitness Testimony (Definitivo)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY

first slide: introduction

third slide: the variables which can play a role in testimony

Additionally, post-event information or exposure to suggestive questions can distort a witness's

fourth slide: identify the perpetrator

You might also like