目击者身份证明
法律心理学
最高法院
心理学
目击者证词
鉴定(生物学)
考试(生物学)
法学
犯罪学
社会心理学
政治学
计算机科学
关系(数据库)
植物
生物
数据库
古生物学
作者
Gary L. Wells,Deah S. Quinlivan
标识
DOI:10.1007/s10979-008-9130-3
摘要
The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling concerning suggestive eyewitness identification procedures (Manson v. Braithwaite, 1977, 432 U.S. 98) has not been revisited by the Court in the intervening 30+ years. Meanwhile, scientific studies of eyewitnesses have progressed and DNA exonerations show that mistaken identification is the primary cause of convictions of the innocent. We analyzed the two-inquiry logic in Manson in light of eyewitness science. Several problems are discussed. Ironically, we note that suggestive identification procedures (determined in the first inquiry) boost the eyewitnesses' standing on three of the five criteria (used in the second inquiry) that are used to decide whether the suggestive procedures were a problem. The net effect undermines safeguards intended by the Court and destroys incentives to avoid suggestive procedures.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI