Expert Testimony Regarding Eyewitness Identification

Increasingly, psychologists are giving expert testimony in court on the accu­ racy of eyewitness identification (Kassin, Tubb, Hosch, & Memon, 2001). Eyewitness experts typically are cognitive or social psychologists who have published research articles on the topic of eyewitness memory. Expert...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Cutler, Brian L. (VerfasserIn)
Beteiligte: Wells, Gary L.
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2009
In:Jahr: 2009
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866156926
003 DE-627
005 20250124054900.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2009 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866156926 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866156926 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Cutler, Brian L.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Expert Testimony Regarding Eyewitness Identification 
264 1 |c 2009 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Increasingly, psychologists are giving expert testimony in court on the accu­ racy of eyewitness identification (Kassin, Tubb, Hosch, & Memon, 2001). Eyewitness experts typically are cognitive or social psychologists who have published research articles on the topic of eyewitness memory. Expert testi­ mony in eyewitness identification is most commonly offered by the defense in criminal cases but is occasionally countered by opposing expert testimony offered by the prosecution. The increasing use of such expert testimony owes largely to the growing recognition that mistaken eyewitness identification is the single most common precursor to the conviction of innocent people (Doyle, 2005). In addition, there is an increasingly strong case that the exist­ ing safeguards designed to protect defendants from erroneous conviction resulting from mistaken identification, such as motions to suppress sugges­ tive procedures, cross-examination, and right to counsel at live lineups, are ineffective (Van Wallendael, Devenport, Cutler, & Penrod, 2007) 
700 1 |a Wells, Gary L.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/212848834.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391837684 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866156926 
LOK |0 005 20231018043725 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE61682842 
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