A blind photo lineup is a police identification procedure designed to prevent suggestive cues. In this method, the officer administering the lineup is unaware of which photograph belongs to the suspect, thereby minimizing the chance of unintentionally influencing the witness's choice.

Blind Photo Lineups

Read the following scenario. Identify at least two procedural errors made by the detective and explain how each could improperly influence the witness's memory and level of certainty.

Analysis of a Witness Identification Scenario

The case of Jennifer Thompson and Ronald Cotton illustrates how suggestive police identification procedures can lead to absolute, yet false, certainty in an eyewitness. Thompson's initial uncertainty about her attacker evolved into absolute confidence after suggestive procedures, leading to her compelling testimony that helped wrongfully convict Cotton.

Jennifer Thompson and Ronald Cotton Eyewitness Case

According to researchers Gary Wells and Deah Quinlivan, certain police identification methods can improperly influence a witness's memory and confidence. These suggestive procedures include creating lineups where the suspect is noticeably different from the others, directly telling the witness who to identify, or providing positive reinforcement like 'Good choice' after an identification is made. Such actions can artificially inflate a witness's certainty, regardless of the accuracy of their choice.

Google

Though human memory is fragile, legal and investigative processes often depend on eyewitness testimony. This reliance is risky, as suggestive police identification procedures can cause eyewitnesses to make incorrect identifications, and such false testimonies can result in wrongful convictions. According to the Innocence Project's analysis of the first 239 DNA exonerations, eyewitness misidentification was a contributing factor in approximately 75% of these cases, establishing it as the leading cause.

Eyewitness Misidentification

The case of Jennifer Thompson and Ronald Cotton is a landmark example of wrongful conviction driven by eyewitness misidentification. During the initial police identification, Thompson was uncertain, stating she thought Cotton was the perpetrator and that he 'looks most like him.' However, by the time of the trial, this uncertainty had transformed into absolute conviction, heavily influenced by suggestive police procedures. Her compelling testimony led to Cotton's conviction and a sentence of life plus 50 years. Despite a second trial resulting in two life sentences, Cotton was exonerated 11 years later when DNA evidence definitively proved his innocence, showing he had served more than a decade for a crime he did not commit.

The Case of Jennifer Thompson and Ronald Cotton

Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020, April 22). Psychology (2nd ed.). OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction

OpenStax Psychology (2nd ed.) Textbook

Suggestive Police Identification Procedures

A classic case of misattribution involves Australian eyewitness expert Donald Thomson. He was arrested and identified by a rape victim from a police lineup. The accusation was made despite Thomson having a solid alibi: at the time of the crime, he was on a live television program discussing the unreliability of eyewitness memory, in the company of an assistant police commissioner. Investigators later confirmed that the victim was attacked while watching the very program Thomson was on. She had misattributed her memory of Thomson's face from the television to the face of her rapist, leading to his wrongful accusation before he was eventually cleared.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After