Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases

One of the most significant consequences of the use of post-conviction DNA testing in the criminal justice system has been the growing recognition that eyewitness identification testimony is simply not as reliable as it was previously considered to be. In approximately 75% of DNA exonerations in the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Lirieka Meintjes-van der Walt
Format: Article
Language:Afrikaans
Published: North-West University 2016-06-01
Series:Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/1247/1271
_version_ 1818246774368763904
author Lirieka Meintjes-van der Walt
author_facet Lirieka Meintjes-van der Walt
author_sort Lirieka Meintjes-van der Walt
collection DOAJ
description One of the most significant consequences of the use of post-conviction DNA testing in the criminal justice system has been the growing recognition that eyewitness identification testimony is simply not as reliable as it was previously considered to be. In approximately 75% of DNA exonerations in the United States, mistaken eyewitness identifications were the principal cause of wrongful convictions. Notwithstanding scientific advances regarding human memory and other factors that could influence identifications by eyewitnesses, courts have not shown eagerness in utilising such scientific knowledge in reaching legal decisions. Two cases have been chosen for discussion in this article. In S v Henderson 27 A 3d 872 (NJ 2011) the New Jersey Supreme Court was the first in State and Federal jurisdictions in the US that adopted a science-based approach to the evaluation of eyewitness evidence. The other case under discussion is S v Mdlongwa 2010 2 SACR 419 (SCA), a South African Supreme Court of Appeal judgment, where the identification of the perpetrator was based on an eyewitness account and the evidence of an expert on CCTV images. In part one of this article the research findings with regard to estimator variables that were acknowledged in S v Henderson are discussed. Part two specifically scrutinizes S v Mdlongwa to determine the extent to which psychological eyewitness research findings are recognised in South Africa as having an influence on the reliability of eyewitness evidence. In Henderson the court recognised that the legal standards governing the admissibility and use of identification evidence lagged far behind the findings of numerous studies in the social sciences. The new wave introduced by S v Henderson has not gone unnoticed in other State courts in the USA. In Massachusetts, for example, the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court convened a study group on Eyewitness Evidence and the resulting report inter alia recommended judicial notice of modern psychological principles, revised jury eyewitness identification instructions and continuous education of both judges and lawyers. Recognition and education pertaining to these factors can and should be incorporated in South Africa.
first_indexed 2024-12-12T14:54:09Z
format Article
id doaj.art-080aa56b194e487ca4b7ea89b3b6432c
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1727-3781
language Afrikaans
last_indexed 2024-12-12T14:54:09Z
publishDate 2016-06-01
publisher North-West University
record_format Article
series Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
spelling doaj.art-080aa56b194e487ca4b7ea89b3b6432c2022-12-22T00:20:57ZafrNorth-West UniversityPotchefstroom Electronic Law Journal1727-37812016-06-0119132http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2016/v19i0a1247Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two CasesLirieka Meintjes-van der Walt0University of Fort HareOne of the most significant consequences of the use of post-conviction DNA testing in the criminal justice system has been the growing recognition that eyewitness identification testimony is simply not as reliable as it was previously considered to be. In approximately 75% of DNA exonerations in the United States, mistaken eyewitness identifications were the principal cause of wrongful convictions. Notwithstanding scientific advances regarding human memory and other factors that could influence identifications by eyewitnesses, courts have not shown eagerness in utilising such scientific knowledge in reaching legal decisions. Two cases have been chosen for discussion in this article. In S v Henderson 27 A 3d 872 (NJ 2011) the New Jersey Supreme Court was the first in State and Federal jurisdictions in the US that adopted a science-based approach to the evaluation of eyewitness evidence. The other case under discussion is S v Mdlongwa 2010 2 SACR 419 (SCA), a South African Supreme Court of Appeal judgment, where the identification of the perpetrator was based on an eyewitness account and the evidence of an expert on CCTV images. In part one of this article the research findings with regard to estimator variables that were acknowledged in S v Henderson are discussed. Part two specifically scrutinizes S v Mdlongwa to determine the extent to which psychological eyewitness research findings are recognised in South Africa as having an influence on the reliability of eyewitness evidence. In Henderson the court recognised that the legal standards governing the admissibility and use of identification evidence lagged far behind the findings of numerous studies in the social sciences. The new wave introduced by S v Henderson has not gone unnoticed in other State courts in the USA. In Massachusetts, for example, the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court convened a study group on Eyewitness Evidence and the resulting report inter alia recommended judicial notice of modern psychological principles, revised jury eyewitness identification instructions and continuous education of both judges and lawyers. Recognition and education pertaining to these factors can and should be incorporated in South Africa.http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/1247/1271Eyewitness evidencewrongful convictionreliability of evidencepsychological eyewitness research findingsestimator variables
spellingShingle Lirieka Meintjes-van der Walt
Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
Eyewitness evidence
wrongful conviction
reliability of evidence
psychological eyewitness research findings
estimator variables
title Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases
title_full Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases
title_fullStr Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases
title_full_unstemmed Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases
title_short Judicial Understanding of the Reliability of Eyewitness Evidence: A Tale of Two Cases
title_sort judicial understanding of the reliability of eyewitness evidence a tale of two cases
topic Eyewitness evidence
wrongful conviction
reliability of evidence
psychological eyewitness research findings
estimator variables
url http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/1247/1271
work_keys_str_mv AT liriekameintjesvanderwalt judicialunderstandingofthereliabilityofeyewitnessevidenceataleoftwocases