Perception and memory: Implications for eyewitness testimony

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Author: A Venter
• Date: 03 September 2019
• Published date: 03 September 2019
• Citation: (2003) 16 SACJ 137
• Pages: 137-162

Perception and memory: Implications

for eyewitness testimony

A VENTER*, DA LOUW** AND T VERSCHOOR***

ABSTRACT

Eyewitness accounts often play a crucial role in solving a case in a court of law. The

widely held belief in the 'ultimate accuracy' of human perception and memory

however, is often without the necessary scientific substantiation. Consequently, it is

not surprising that legal history is often tainted with tragic miscarriages of justice,

which have resulted in financial ruin, loss of reputation, imprisonment and even

execution. It is, therefore, regrettable that legal professionals and decision-makers

have received 'almost no training' in the basic psychological processes of information

processing. This article aims to provide professionals in the legal system with an

overview of the role that perception and memory play in eyewitness testimony.

Introduction

The eyewitness information supplied by the victim of a crime is the most

common form of witnessing and often the single most important determinant

in whether a case will be solved in a court of law.

1

The fate of the accused

often depends on other humans' eyewitness testimony, as innocent people

might face the possibility of faulty imprisonment, financial ruin, and loss of

reputation as a result of this testimony. A victim may also be dependent on

witness accuracy; if a witness' testimony is not accepted, the victim may

suffer from further exposure to the perpetrator, financial losses (through the

rejection of insurance claims, court costs, or loss of revenue), or

psychological trauma, while disillusionment with the legal system is

inevitable.

2

As Samaha

3

succinctly states: 'Faulty identifications present the

* B



MA Clinical Psychology (OFS),

Lecturer at Vista University.

This article originates from

the author's doctoral thesis written at the Centre for Psychology and the Law, University of the

Free State.

** PhD Psychology (Potch) PhD Criminology (Pretoria),

Professor and Chair of the Department

of Psychology and Head of the Centre for Psychology and the Law, University of the Free State.

*** B Iuris LLD (Pretoria)

Vice-Rector, University of the Free State.

1

A Memon and D B Wright

Factors influencing witness evidence (2000); J

C Yuille and J L

Cutshall 'A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime' (1986) 71(2)

Journal of Applied

Psychology 291; J

C Brigham et al 'Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in a field setting'

(1982) 42(4)

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

673.

2

G S Goodman et al 'Evaluating eyewitness testimony in adults and children' in A K Hess and

I B Weiner (eds)

The handbook of forensic psychology

2ed (1999) 218.

3

J Samaha

Criminal Procedure

(1990) 370.

137

(2003) 16 SACJ 137

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

138



SACJ •

(2003) 16

greatest single threat to the achievement of our ideal that no innocent man

shall be punished.'

Due to a belief in the ultimate accuracy of human perception and memory,

eyewitness testimony is regarded as an important basis for decision-making

in courts.

4

The following statement illustrates this viewpoint: 'A witness'

credibility means not only his honesty but also his powers of perception, his

memory and his accuracy of narration.'

5

The consequences of faulty

perception and memory is demonstrated in the United States of America

by evidence which indicated that 36 of the first 40 people, who were

exonerated based on DNA evidence, had been convicted on the testimony

provided by eyewitnesses.

6

This number has recently increased to 62 of

which 52 contained identifications from mistaken eyewitness identification.

7

Loftus

8

justly emphasizes that being falsely accused of a crime, is one of the

most devastating occurrences possible for a human being and along with

Kassin

9

argue that the tragedy of this situation should force role players, such

as legal professionals and researchers, to protect people against the danger of

mistaken eyewitness testimony. However, due to the difficulty in objectively

testing the accuracy of witnesses, the legal system often gives credit to or

rejects the memory of witnesses without substantiation. If the potential

unreliability of eyewitness testimony is considered to be one of the most

serious problems in the administration of criminal justice,

10

can the

assumption be made that a given witness has a prodigious or even a better

memory than others without an objective assessment of memory ability?

11

4

C R Bartol and A M Bartol

Psychology and Law 2ed (1994).

5

Plaaslike Boeredienste (Edms) Bpk v CHEMFOS Bpk

1986 (1) SA 819 (A).

6

K Foxhall 'Suddenly, a big impact on criminal justice' (2000) 31(1)

Monitor on Psychology 1;

A

Sinatra 'It's him — or is it ? Mistaken identity can land innocent people in jail', available at

http://

abcnews.go.com/sections/us/dailynews/eyewitness_testimony.html;

G L Wells et al 'Eyewitness

identification procedures: Recommendations for line-ups and photospreads' (1998) 22

Law

Hum Behav

603; E Connors et al

Convicted by furies, exonerated by science: Case studies in

the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial.

(1996) NIH Research report, United

States Department of Justice.

S Kassin et al 'On the 'general acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of

the experts' (2001) 56(5)

American Psychologist

405.

8

E F Loftus 'Psychologists in the eyewitness world' (1993) 48(5)

American Psychologist

550.

9





S

M Kassin 'Eyewitness identification procedures: The fifth rule' (1998) 22(6)

Law Hum Behav

649.

10

M D Robinson et al 'Reaction time and assessments of cognitive effort as predictors of

eyewitness memory accuracy and confidence' (1997)

82(3) Journal of Applied Psychology

416;

J I Shaw and P Skolnick Sex differences, weapon focus, and eyewitness reliability' (1994)

134(4)

Journal of Social Psychology

413; D Navon 'How critical is the accuracy of an

eyewitness' memory? Another look at the issue of line-up diagnostidty' (1990) 75(5)

Journal

of Applied Psychology

506; E F Loftus 'Impact of expert psychological testimony on the

unreliability of eyewitness identification' (1980a) 65(1)

Journal of Applied Psychology

9.

11

Law Society Transvaal v Matthews 1989

(4) SA 389 CO;

Izaaks v Schneider

1991(3) SA 675 (Nm).

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd