Eyewitness Identification Jury Instructions: Do They Enhance Evidence Evaluation?

Mistaken eyewitness identifications are a leading cause of wrongful convictions. Even with procedural safeguards (e.g., cross-examination) in place, jurors still have difficulty evaluating the reliability of eyewitness identifications. The purpose of the present line of research is to examine whethe...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Berman, Marlee Kind (Author)
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: 2015
In:Year: 2015
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a22000002 4500
001 186613518X
003 DE-627
005 20231018043652.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)186613518X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP186613518X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Berman, Marlee Kind  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Eyewitness Identification Jury Instructions: Do They Enhance Evidence Evaluation? 
264 1 |c 2015 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Mistaken eyewitness identifications are a leading cause of wrongful convictions. Even with procedural safeguards (e.g., cross-examination) in place, jurors still have difficulty evaluating the reliability of eyewitness identifications. The purpose of the present line of research is to examine whether the issue-specific judicial instructions, set forth by the New Jersey Supreme Court (New Jersey v. Henderson, 2011), effectively sensitize jurors to eyewitness identification accuracy. Results of the first study indicate that the current Henderson instructions delivered on issues specific to a case are not as effective as intended. Results of the second study indicate a sensitivity effect, such that mock jurors were most sensitive to the quality of the eyewitness identification when they received judicial instruction on all eyewitness variables and evaluated the evidence prior to rendering a verdict. Implications of the research as well as ideas for future research are discussed 
856 4 0 |u https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1874&context=gc_etds  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
912 |a NOMM 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 439181594X 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 186613518X 
LOK |0 005 20231018043652 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE63313110 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw