YAY! THE EYEWITNESS ID RESO IS GETTING A HEARING ON
TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2014 IN THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE!
WE REALLY HAD TO FIGHT FOR THIS!
HCR 192 EYEWITNESS ID TASK FORCE JUD, FIN
REQUESTING THE CONVENING OF A TASK FORCE TO ESTABLISH STATEWIDE PROCEDURAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION AND INTERROGATION OF SUSPECTS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.
|3/14/2014||H||Resolution scheduled to be heard by JUD on Tuesday, 03-18-14 2:00PM in Room 325.|
EASY WAY TO SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION:
CAP POSITION: SUPPORT FOR HB 247
- 2013 was a record-breaking year for exonerations in the US with 87 exonerations
- Eyewitness ID has been shown to be accurate in only 8% of test cases
- Of 312 exonerations, nearly 75% of the cases were eyewitness mis-identifications
- Faulty eyewitness identifications are the most prevalent cause of wrongful conviction
- Alvin Jardine from Maui served 22 years in prison for a crime he did not commit based on eyewitness mis-identification
- When police are focused on eyewitness ids that may be faulty, the police are led away from real perpetrator
- American Judicature Society’s (AJS) rigorous, robust scientific field study demonstrated the superiority of the blind-sequential procedure over the blind-simultaneous procedure
- The AJS study showed there was NO LOSS in correct identifications using the blind-sequential procedure and a 50% reduction in incorrect identifications.
- Justice demands that the evidence be reliable before someone’s liberty is taken away
Here is a simple statement you can use:
The single greatest contributing factor to wrongful convictions is eyewitness misidentification, contributing to nearly 75 percent of the 312 wrongful convictions overturned by DNA evidence. Fortunately, there are readily available changes to police identification procedures that can greatly improve the reliability of eyewitness evidence and enhance law enforcement’s ability to zero in on true perpetrators early on in the investigative process. Failure to implement scientifically-supported best practices not only leaves innocent people vulnerable, it also puts the public at great risk since any focus on the wrong person allows the real perpetrator to remain undetected.