Reading Blog due Thursday 2/9 @ midnight

I didn’t understand how much the emergency call-taker had to do. I thought that they just had to figure out the location of the crime and send people there. I was surprised to find out that they had to get information about the criminal and try to get as much information about the crime as possible.

I found that when creating the mug book it is important for the preparer of the book to compose it in a way that it doesn’t suggest a certain type of person. I wasn’t truly aware at how a certain group of pictures could affect someone’s memory. In this guideline I also found it interesting that just the fact if a picture is in color or black and white has an effect on the witness. I found it important that the investigator tells the witness that they don’t have to choose a picture and that if they don’t the case will still continue.

Something that I would think it would be common sense, but isn’t always looked at is the fact that a comfortable witness will provide more information. I find it funny that this can be so easily overlooked. I also find it important for the investigator to tell the witness that they are welcome to come back with any further information that they may recall later. I would think if the witness did want to talk further that it would be hard to tell if they were influenced in any way. This is why I found it to be very important to document everything that is said throughout the entire process.

I found it interesting at how much time must be spent on selecting a line up whether pictures or live. They have to make sure that the main suspect doesn’t stand out and that they all look somewhat alike, but not too much that they all blend together. I also liked that they used fillers when creating a lineup so that if the witness did pick one of the fillers they would be able to figure out if the witness was having troubles with memory.

When going over the guidelines I wanted to go further into the initial contact with the witness. I choose that one because I feel like there is a lot of psychology behind it. The principle if gives is “A comfortable witness provides more information.” I believe this is cognitive psychology because it has to do with their mindset and memory. In order for the witness to remember as much information as possible they need to be comfortable. The reason cognitive psychology relates to this guideline is because it has to deal with memory and perception. This also is used when conducting the interview as well because the interviewer has to be aware of the eyewitness’s surroundings and how they will impact his or her memory recollection. Also all eyewitness testimony is part of legal psychology because it is legal information. Legal psychology is made up of social and cognitive psychology.

The second guideline that I looked at further was investigating the scene. The principle that was used for this area roughly stated that the preliminary investigator should make sure to preserve and document the scene including both witnesses and physical evidence. The area of psychology that best deals with this is forensic psychology because of the fact that it is a crime scene. It also has to do with legal psychology. Anytime that an eyewitness is being talked to legal psychology is being used. Forensic psychology is being used in this area of a crime because it has to do with reports, evaluations, and documentation.

I found the guide to be very interesting as a whole. Aside from crime television shows, I have not had much background on the topic.

One thing that I found very interesting was the section about the lineup. I learned a lot of details about it that I had not previously known. For example, in a photo lineup the fillers generally fit the description, but there is only one suspect’s photo present. Also, there can only be a minimum on five fillers in a photo lineup. The overall intention is to make sure that the suspect does not stand out. The photo lineup itself is also supposed to be preserved.

There are also some similarities in a live lineup. There is only supposed to be one suspect and fillers generally fit the witness’s description. A difference is that in a live lineup there is supposed to be a minimum of four fillers. Another think that was interesting about this was that the filler’s are supposed to be consistent with the description, but they are not supposed to resemble the suspect so close that the witness has a hard time identifying.

An aspect that I found particularly surprising was the detailed role of the call-taker/dispatcher. I had originally believed that the call-taker was in charge of answering the phones gaining vague information about the crime that was taking part, and get the location so that the police officers could be dispatched. Although considering it now, after class, it makes sense, but I didn’t realize that the information taken by the call-taker was important information for an investigation. I also hadn’t realized that they should have some training in interviewing as they are required to be non-suggestive and ask open-ended questions. I found it really fascinating that I had not known this information previously.

Reading through the guide I noticed various aspects of psychology. Specifically I noticed cognitive psychology and social psychology. Additionally I noticed some aspects of behavioral psychology. I also found that in my opinion many of the various aspects intertwine within the guidelines.

For example, when obtaining information from the witnesses, one need to establish rapport, make the witness feel comfortable, encourage the witness to contact investigators if they have more information, and instruct them to not discuss details with other potential witnesses. Making the witness feel comfortable and establishing rapport are aspects of cognitive psychology. They are concerned about the mindset of the witness as the crime they have just seen could have easily shaken them up. Contact with other individuals involves social psychology. This also is involved in making them feel comfortable enough to discuss what happened with the investigators. It additionally describes how witnesses may act around each other, potentially working with identifying the perpetrator. In regards to this is an aspect of behavioral psychology. The witness is encouraged to be comfortable and freely describe what happened from their perspective without receiving leading questions.

Another example of this is in assessing the accuracy of individual elements of the witness’s statement. With this guideline, investigators need to review each component of the witness’s statement separately, look for inconsistencies, and review the statement in the context of information the investigators have from other sources. In this cognitive psychology could influence the information that the witness provides. They may come up with additional details after the initial interview once their minds have settled down or they return to the scene. They also may have had contact with additional people (i.e. other witnesses), and that information has influenced their knowledge of what happened. This is also tied in with social psychology in terms of how one person’s ideas can influence those of another person. Social psychology can also come into play with rapport. If the investigator has established rapport with the witness, they may be more willing to bring forward additional information, as they feel comfortable.

I really liked reading this guide, which was actually kind of surprising to me. After all, it is a handbook, and those usually aren’t the most interesting novels to read. I had no idea that law enforcement was so organized. Television shows depict “cop shops” as disorganized, fly by the seat of their pants type organizations. It is nice and reassuring to know that not only is there more structure than what television shows us, but that there are many detailed steps and procedures law enforcement takes when dealing with each case.

One thing I found interesting was reading about the mug books. I’ve never heard of a mug book before. When I think about an eye witness picking out the perpetrator out of a group of suspects, I almost always think about a line up. It was interesting to hear in class today that that is a rare occasion, and that Canada actually does live line ups far more often than the States do. I feel like mug books would be more difficult because people can look way different in a picture than they can in person. Even personally I can pick multiple pictures of myself where I look different in that particular photograph than I do in real life.

One thing I thought was interesting in the guide was how throughout the whole procedure, cops are suppose to remind witnesses not to discuss the case with other witnesses. This makes complete sense. Like we’ve talked about in class, just hearing someone else’s view of the crime can completely alter what you think you saw. Cops don’t want other stories affecting one another. However, part of me almost wonders if cops shouldn’t remind witnesses. What if the witness hadn’t even thought of discussing the case with the others? Now the cop has just put that thought into the witness’ head and then the witness all of the sudden may now want to discuss the case with the other victims or witnesses.

Psychology is everywhere in this guidebook. This class has been very fun and interesting, because you get to see how involved psychology really is in the law. I like this because sometimes I feel like the general population doesn’t appreciate psychology as much as they should. Maybe if they know how involved psychology was in the law, they would have not only a better appreciation for the science, but a deeper understanding and respect for psychology as well.

I sort of picked multiple sections when it came to looking at the guide from a psychologist standpoint because as I just said, psychology is found throughout the entire thing. The bulk of the handbook describes the different procedures and steps that are taken to identify the perpetrator (duh, because that is the ultimate goal). So when you compose mug books, line ups, do a show up, etc. it is very important to have the right environment and setting for a witness to truly be helpful in these procedures. Psychology can deal with face recognition and memory recall, two huge important factors in these identification processes. Otto MacLin deals a lot with facial patterns and recognition, something that is obviously very prominent in these sorts of things (if not the entire procedure).

Another aspect that deals with a lot of psychology is when the cops interview the witnesses. In some ways, this is just like a session between a clinical psychologist and a victim of PSTD. The witness more than likely has gone through some sort of traumatic event (although I realize each case is a case by case basis) and is now discussing the details of the crime with the interviewer. Just like in a clinical setting, the handbook discusses the importance of making the witness feel safe, comfortable, relaxed, etc. That way he or she can feel comfortable to disclose as much information as accurately as possible.

One thing that I found to be very interesting is that showups sometimes occur in which witnesses may be asked to identify someone in the field. While they still have to go through the same procedures for first documenting initial descriptions and statements, this field identification is different because it is more immediate. They may lead to a more directional approach for the parts of the case that are to follow, however, there are also things that may easily go wrong and lead to problems later on down the road.

I was also very surprised by the fact that dispatchers have such a big role in the process of dealing with witnesses. I always just figured that they answered the call, told the police, and went back to the phone lines with relatively little contact with the caller unless it was needed for moral support.

Though we have talked a lot about lineups now and all of the things that can go wrong with dealing with witnesses, it all comes together in a different way once you see it laid out in black and white. There is a very long list of things to do and not do when dealing with witnesses, such as not asking leading questions but clarifying all information that is received. The sheer number of tools used for identification purposes and also the rules that come along with them are also somewhat surprising. I also find it interesting that after so many years they haven’t just picked the best type of lineup and a set of rules and mandated it for everyone to use except under special conditions or with permission.

Basically the entire handbook dealt with psychology in one way or another because the main points in the handbook were going over how to handle witnesses. Since witnesses are people, they have to be treated very carefully and have their mental states considered at each stage of the process.

Social psychology has a big part in the section about interviewing the witnesses. It is important to establish trust and a feeling of comfort when interviewing them so that they’ll feel more willing and able to give information, regardless of whether or not they thing it is relevant. In addition, witnesses must try to keep themselves from interacting with each other or having outside influences such as the media interfering with their present circumstances. Though these interactions are an everyday part of social life and human relations, it is very important to keep a close eye on them so that they don’t get out of hand and lead to a contamination of the witness’s memory.

Cognitive psychology comes into play a lot in the section about the duties of the preliminary investigating officer. It is up to that person to perceive and remember things that occurred upon initial arrival and document them as soon as possible. The officer must take the information he receives and then interpret it, trying to figure out things like the most likely path of exit or motive of the perpetrator. As he is performing all of his initial duties, he will likely be thinking about the series of events that led up to the crime and try to reconstruct it as he gets statements from witnesses.

The part of the guide I found most interesting was investigating the scene (Preliminary Investigating Officer). The Guide states, 'The methods used by the preliminary investigating officer have a direct impact on the amount and accuracy of the information obtained throughout the investigation". This one person has a huge impact on how the rest of the case is going to go. I found it interesting that it was this person's responsibility to identify the perpetrator. It is also their responsibility to verify the identity of the witnesses, separate the witnesses, and search for other witnesses. Next this officer needs to conduct interviews with the witnesses. For this process the officer must establish rapport, figure out their condition, use open ended questions, clarify information received, document the information, encourage an open line of communication for further information, discourage talking to or listen to the media, and discourage discussing their view with other witnesses.

I think that psychology influences many of the reasons behind the guidelines. For example, the guide states, "Use open-ended questions (e.g., “What can you tell me about the car?”); augment with closed-ended questions (e.g., “What color was the car?”). Avoid leading questions (e.g., “Was the car red?”)." This guideline is based upon the Loftus and Palmer research conducted in 1974. In this study subtle variation in variations in wording were used, but results show huge differences in memory.
Another example of psychology helping to shape guidelines is when the guide says, "Encourage the witness to avoid contact with the media or exposure to media accounts concerning the incident". This instruction leads to the aspect of witness confidence and cognitive dissonance. If the witness views outside influences that agree with partially what s/he thought s/he saw, the witness may become more confident even if they were uncertain about the information before.

I found reading the entire guide was very interesting. Im constintly amazed on how different and more tedious this process is from how i though it to be from pop culture references. Because pop culture references are all I knew about the subject I never knew the tedious process on how to obtain information from a witness. An example of this is only asking open ended questions like instead of saying was he wearing a jacket to what was he wearing the latter being the right one. This help perserve the original memory so you dont get any misleading information. The whole process seems so nerve racking and tedious that I dont think that it would be fun asking the questions or being the one being asked. I was most surprized by dispatchers. I thought that they really didnt do anything beside answer the phone and put out the call to the police, but they do way more then that. They have to stay on with the witness and get as much intial information as possible to help with the case. This whole process was so surprizing to me. What also interested me was the line up process and how they have to make sure that everything doesnt just point out the suspect, and arent bias. It was also very surprizing that we dont do as many live lineups as I intially thought. We do more picture line ups. After reading the guide line I found that there was a lot of psychology that surround the guide lines and procedure that people have to follow in these situations. The most obvious was social psychology. I say this because the police officers to the detectives have to talk and get as much information they can from a witness so they have to know how to talk to people and their reactions to certain external stimuli. The other forms of psychology I thought to be in there was cognitive psychology in trying to gain confidence and repoor with the witness. I say this because they have to influence the witness to gain the most information they can.

One thing that surprised me after reading this guide is that there were so many different aspects that can lead to a successful or unsuccesful interiew with a witness. I wondered if older law enforcement officers knew that they way that they asked questions to a witness could influence what kind of answer they give. Another thing that surprised me is there is no formal training course to complete before an officer or some other official can interview a witness or interogate a suspect. I thought that in this day and age that the government state and federal would have something set up in order to make sure that the judicial system is working the way it meant to work instead of sending innocent people to prison or jail.

In the first section of the guide under part see; the first rule of procedure is "Establish rapport with the witness". I think after a crime has occured and the first responders get there chance are emotions could be pretty high. Its important to let people vent and gather themselves before you push them to hard. If you don't you could eventually make them mad becasue they think you are mocking or contradicting them. I know that if I told someone that I saw something happen and they tell me that I didn't it wouldn't sit well with me and maybe I wouldn't tell them other things they wanted to know, or couldn't remember because I'm still upset for them not believing me in the first place.

Is That What I Said?: Witnesses' Responses to Interviewer Modifications,Jennifer S. Hunt and Eugene Borgida Law and Human Behavior , Vol. 25, No. 6 (Dec., 2001), pp. 583-603 (Database JSTOR)

In Section 3 under part A the third rule for preinterview preparations and decisions is Select an environment that minimizes distractions while maintaining the comfort level of the witness. If a witness is in an enviroment where they don't feel safe, or just don't like they may not recall certain details of a scene becasue they are preoccupied thinking about how much they don't like the room they are in. What if a police station had a small interview room and a witness was brought in for question? I think they answers would change versus if the questions were asked in a room where the witness wasn't distracted.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.1789/full

Jumping into reading this guide initially I thought I was going to recieve basic information that was already generally well known. However, there were definitely aspects that were both interesting and surprising. First off, I never realized how big of an impact the initial dispatch reciever officer played in gathering information from a witness. A dispatcher is responsible for gathering information accurately and preserving the safety of the witness. These two elements are crucial in the future credibility of the witness's eyewitness evidence. Secondly, I thought it was interesting that preliminary investigating officers are instructed to separate all the witnesses. This can prevent witnesses testimony from becoming homogeneous or mixed together.

Something that I found particularly interesting concerning the lineup process was how aspects such as the environment are important. In instances where composites are used distractions within an environment can effect the accuracy of the final witness account. Another interesting component that I discovered was that written documentation during witness account recall can help determine the credibility and confidence the witness demonstrated. The guide certainly opened me up to some new and interesting information about the witness description process.

Psychology plays a major factor in completing the witness account successfully. One major psychological underpin of the process is Cognitive Psychology. This is demonstrated by witness perception and officer documentation throughout the case. Witness perception is so crucial when hearing witness statements. For instance, witnesses should be instructed to recreate the occurrence by answering open ended questions. This prevents witnesses from producing accounts that have been affected by biased or misleading questioning. Officers arriving on the scene are responsible for gathering and questioning potential witnesses and suspects. These officers have to remember what circumstances and environment of the scene entailed, and how the people around related to the event.

Clinical Pscyhology is also related to this guidebook through the proper interviewing format of the investigating officers. These officers delve into the minds of witnesses in order to retrieve any details that might help to direct the investigation. This can be problematic when witnesses may feel uncomfortably stressed out about reliving the event in their minds. Consequently, investigators have to establish rapport to make each witness feel more comfortable with addressing the event. These are just several examples of how the interviewing process incorporates psychological discipline in order to conduct an accurate investigation.

The Guide was a different type of infomative reading that I had not previously encountered with either legal and forensic disciplines. Psychology is an intrical part of witness portion of the the investigation process. Without properly following psychological and legal guidelines, officers may end up following up on inaccurate leads. This is a slippery slope that can lead to falty convictions and more occurences of crime. It is important to realize the gravity of the protocol provided by The Guide.

I didn’t know how important the 911-Emergency dispatcher was to the whole process of an investigation. I thought their job was to gather only a minute amount of information and that consisted of the victim’s name, their location, and to notify officers nearby who could attend to the situation. I had no idea that they had specific guidelines on how to act, what to ask, and information about the perpetrator, etc. The dispatcher is the start to the investigation if the situation arises where someone needs to call 911.

I thought the “Mug books” portion of the Eyewitness guide was very interesting. A mug book is used when there are no leads to a perpetrator and all other reliable sources are exhausted. I think that using a mug book could lead to inaccurate assumptions and the guidelines really should be followed in order to prevent biased judgments from taking place. After what we talked about in class I feel that most police officers don’t have enough training in order to have the ability to pick an accurate perpetrator. The guidelines however are very specific in how to prevent or decrease inaccurate assumptions and to increase the probability of finding an actual lead. I think that it was a great idea that they categorize the criminals so that people know what crimes they have committed. However, just because they were caught for a theft crime doesn’t mean they didn’t or are capable of committing a rape or arson. So the categories can only do so much and could actually rule out other suspects in a negative way.

Documentation is also a very important process in this eyewitness guide as well. Police officers have to gather the exact information given to them. For instance the witnesses own words and not a biased or manipulated version. Also time is an important aspect because it is important to know the date and time when the information was documented in order to distinguish any change in the witness’s memory or judgment.

I feel that many aspects of psychology go into the eyewitness evidence guide. The many aspects that I could see are social, cognitive, and bio psychology. Social psychology is used when police officers talk to witnesses, suspects, and other fellow law enforcement agencies. Cognitive psychology is used when solving the crime. For instance when putting together a story, searching for the suspects or perpetrator, searching for evidence, preventing contamination of the evidence, preventing biased information, and using gathered information to find the correct perpetrator. Biopsychology can be used when evaluating defendants in a case to determine if the crime committed was due to their psychological state and not because they were functioning normal. Also biopsychology is used when dealing with emotions, cognitions, and other mental processes that are involved in a crime and/or court case.

Overall, I found this guide to be more interesting than I had initially thought it was going to be. I think it's very important information that should be read by all officers, dispatchers, etc. I think if these guidelines would be followed more carefully, then we would have fewer wrongful convictions in the US.

The most interesting part of the guideline was the section about the dispatchers. I hadn't thought of their role in the process at all, but they have a huge impact on the whole case. They are the first ones to even speak with a witness. If they accidentally ask a leading question, then that information will be repeated by the witness from there on out. The dispatchers have an extremely tough job. They have to mediate the situation, calm the caller, and provide detailed information to the police. They have a lot of responsibilities.

I was surprised by how much work that goes in to a proper lineup. I just thought it was a quick process because that's how it's portrayed on television. But after class discussions, reading the text, and reading this guideline it's clear that a lot more thought and planning must go into a proper line up and mugbook. It's extremely important to have a fair and accurate lineup. We don't want to send an innocent person to prison, and we also don't want a guilty person being sent free because their defense was able to determine that there was an unfair lineup.

Cognitive psychology has a huge impact on many different areas of witness testimony. The witness must be able to recall and remember details of the crime without being prompted by leading questions. The police officer needs to be able to figure out how to retrieve this details and information without contaminated the evidence. A dispatcher especially is making use of cognitive psychology. They are taking in so much information at one time. They need to be able to process this information and correctly inform others, as well.

Social psychology plays a role, as well. All areas of the police force need to work together well. They need to be able to communicate effectively and transfer evidence between eachother without making mistakes. One specific guideline that is extremely important with this is that witnesses must be told that the perpetrator may not actually be in the lineup they are shown. A lot of times people will feel pressured to pick out a suspect, because if they don't they may feel that they have failed as a witness. I think it's important they don't feel pressured to pick somebody if they don't recognize anyone in the lineup. Picking the wrong person is always worse than not picking anyone. social psychology is also involved with the police officer establishing rapport with the witness. the witness needs to be able to trust the person they are confiding in.

I was surprised to find out that the 9-1-1 dispatcher played an important role in eyewitness testimony. I never knew that they had to do so much when called. I figured they just had to find out the location and ask if everyone was alright or what happened until the authorities arrived to take over. They have a lot of training that they go through in order to find out more about the crime. Each one of the phone calls is taped so that they can trace back to the tape when trying to solve the crime. The dispatchers have a lot to keep in mind when they have the eyewitness on the phone. It surprised me that there is even a special way to ask questions starting with open ended questions. It is important for the dispatcher to keep the witness calm until the police get there to take over, but that initial call is very important in the investigation.
Cognitive psychology plays a vital role in investigating a crime. Especially for an eyewitness. It is important in a lineup for investigators to choose a lineup that will help find the perpetrator, so it is important for the police to find fillers that accurately describe the witness' description. The witness needs to be able to pick out the perpetrator from when they saw the crime happen. This can be hard because the witness can be emotionally scarred from the event and make it harder to pick out the perp.
Social psychology also plays a big role in the investigation because everybody involved needs to work together. The police need to communicate with the victim and the witness' so they can get a better understanding of the description of the perpetrator. The witness' also need to communicate well with the dispatcher so they can get help. Overall everyone needs to communicate effectively so the crime can be solved.

The first thing I found interesting was the importance of open-ended questions. Almost all job descriptions encompassed that point in some aspect. In the book and in class, it mentioned how important it is to watch the wording of the sentence, which has proven to be so true. It is amazing how often we must look at how and what we say in order to receive the result were looking for. Any slight error in our word choice could allude to unwanted things such as misidentification, or giving the wrong message. I guess in some ways, it is amazing we can communicate the way we do when our words can give non-verbal messages in every setting.
Another thing I found interesting was the “mug books.” I didn’t know they kept a book with suspects in case they run out of leads in the investigation. In some ways, it is a great idea but also very interesting. I was really surprised to learn about specifications, and the great extent to keep the photos all formatted the same. The most interesting was the photos format, like the color. I would just assume they would all be color.
The third thing that caught my eye was developing and using composite images. In one of the steps, it mentioned to keep the witness separate, and comprise composites in separate locations. I think this would be a very interesting job in this scenario. It would be so remarkable to how two different people who saw the same crime, describe the perpetrator. In comparing them, it would be fascinating to see the differences and how descriptive they are. I think it would also be interesting to do the witness with two different sketch artists and see the comparison no how accurately the sketch artist could depict what the witness was describing.
One type of psychology that relates to this is social psychology. Social psychology refers to an individual’s behavior, personality and attitude that are influenced by social groups. In this case, the police and investigators have large control over someone’s attitude and personality in these settings. If the officers are condoning and rude, the witnesses are less likely to help out. On the other hand, if the officers produce a great report with the witness, their influence on the witness will be grand. Their communication also has a great influence on the witness beliefs. By their word choice, they can sway the witness into believing one thing, for instance when an investigator says, “Was the car red?” The individual is more likely to say yes than if the officer would have just asked what color the car was. Their influence is psychological affect the witness memory.
Another type of psychology that relates to this is behavior psychology. Behavioral psychology is examining ones behaviors. Like mentioned earlier, a police officer demeanor can affect ones attitude which ultimately leads to the behavioral choices one makes. Behaviors are also important when investigating a witness. Understanding their behavior can help the investigator decide how to question and respond to the witness.

After reading the guide I found that the mug books, and preparing of such, very intriguing. It never occurred to me that the pictures assembled are those of current or previous criminals. I just figured the pictures or lineups were from volunteers, not random photos already attained. I also never thought how intense such an event could potentially be for an eyewitness. I always thought from movies people would file into a room, with a view only the witness can see, and they would go on to choose the perpatrator. I had no idea the nervousness or pressure one would feel in that situation. I also never thought about 'good' and 'bad' lineups. How they need similar people or how it needs to be near impossible for a non-witness to choose the suspect. I guess Hollywood just blurred my notion of how the actual justice system works. In the same regard how a bad lineup can ruin an innocent person's life, the same is true for getting a guilty person off the hook because of the injustice in the lineup. With all these rules and procedures one would think these are mandatory and applied through instruction and training. However, these are merely guidelines and neither of the previous statements are true.

The parts of psychology present are that of manipulation, leading questions, and the like. Manipulation is shown throught the police work and dealings with the witnesses. They purposefully attempt to force a witness into choosing the person they have in custody, most often. They put bad lineups in front of the witness in order to coax them into their specific choice. Its quite unfair and wrong actually. However, from our class discussions apparently police are stubborn in their ways.

One of the things I found interesting in the guideline book was the initial contact with the witness or the pre-interview section. I thought it was interesting because one of the procedures for this is asking the witness whether or not they have had any prior experience with law enforcement. I feel like that's a weird guideline to have because usually if a crime is committed the police officers are usually worrying about getting the witness's testimony and are not concerned with whether or not the witness has had any prior experience with law enforcement. I understand the point of it is to reassure and make the witness feel comfortable I just found it really surprising. A lot of the other things discussed in this section also seems pretty straight forward and easy to understand but I'm sure most of it isn't followed exactly that way.
When it comes to psychology, it plays a big role in lineup procedure, especially cognitive psychology. When a witness is looking at a lineup it needs to be hard enough where the suspect doesn't stand out but also not impossible. It may be difficult for a witness to pick someone out of a lineup because they be stressed from the crime itself or may feel as if they have to pick someone from the lineup when they really don't. So it's important for whoever is conducting the lineup makes the witness comfortable and at ease during the process.
Social psychology plays an important role too especially when it comes to the actual crime scene. You have a lot of people interacting with each other and police officers and detectives have a big influence on witnesses. They need to be careful to not lead the witness towards saying something that they might not have said and make sure the witness is confident in what they're saying.

I found the mug book to be very interesting, especially with how the preparer of the book has to compose it. I found it interesting how color schemes of black and white could create an effect on the eye witness determining who the perpetrator could be. In class I learned, along with the mug book briefly mentioning grouping pictures together of possible suspects for the eyewitness to determine which one is the culprit. I’ve watched a lot of TV shows where usually they have them line up in a live viewing, but learned today that that only happens once in a blue moon. I’m much more better at seeing someone in person and remembering them, more as seeing them on a picture, and this section mentions how memory plays an important role in determining the bad guys to the really bad guys.

I was surprised with the guide prompts that the interviewers take while investigation and interviewing of the eyewitnesses is happening. The guide asks the interviewers to have open-ended questions, so that they can hear what the witness has to say, fully. But, in class we discussed how many interviewers do the complete opposite and bluntly ask leading questions to get the witness to speak out more. These interviewers are in the wrong, whether they know it or not. There’s a way to get answers, and asking leading questions in a crime scene is a no go according to the guide, hopefully soon these interviewers will be trained the right way and only ask open-ended questions to seek out the answers they desire.

Another surprising aspect of the guide was the role the dispatchers play in the process of dealing with the witnesses whom call them. I’ve never really thought of them of more than just being on the other side of the phone recording the information being told to them, and then just simply reporting it to the police station. But apparently I was a little off on that assumption they not only listen, record, and pass on the word, but actually have more of a role then I ever imagined they did.

A form of psychology in this guide would be forensic psychology. Here we are dealing with the crime scene and how the investigation is taking place. Documents need to be preserved by both the witnesses and the physical evidence. Reports, evaluations, and documentation of the crime scenes all lead to forensic psychology. Also legal psychology is playing a role in these crimes as well because every time a witness is being talked to by the officers, legal action is being placed, which means legal psychology is happening all around the crime scene as the law enforcers do their jobs with the witnesses.

Another form of psychology in this guide would be social psychology and how it plays a big role in the guide dealing with interviewing witnesses and how the witnesses shouldn’t talk over with other witnesses how they saw the crime play out. While the interviewer is trying to come off as a trusting and comforting person, to make the witnesses feel more at ease when they are to answer their questions and expose information that could be vital for what just happened. The media, if a witness were to accidently slip up and talk to someone, could definitely manipulate the situation to sell their stuff. But the important key advice for this section is that we need to make sure to keep a tight grip on what’s being said, so contamination doesn’t happen.

The entire guide in itself was pretty intriguing! Even though we talked about these proceedures in class, I never figured that there was an actual guide on how to treat the criminal timeline.
One thing that stood out to me was the "proper" way for a 911 dispatcher to handle a call. It was interesting to read the dispatcher's role and all the things they must to do in order to conduct an efficient method of acquiring any and all information possible from the eye witness on the phone. Honestly some of the things the quide mentioned that a dispatcher should do seemed to be more common sense to me than anything, such as comfort the caller by assuring them that the authorities are on their way, keeping them calm, and the identifying of the subject. I was really surprised how much of an affect the dispatcher could have on the eye witnesses' testimony and even their memory of the crime and crime scene. Just like we talked about in class how police can screw with the validity of the eye witness's story by "accidentally inserting" information into their memory and asking non-open ended questions.
Some prominent elements of psychology that you can see in these methods and proceedures include social psychology, cognitive psychology, and biopsychology. Social psychology revolves around the methods to which the police question eye witnesses. Social psychology could help to decipher legit witnesses from the "phonies", meaning those who's testimonies can be trusted. Cognitive psychology could be used to analyze witnesses and their memory processes. This testing could be used on the witness stand by professionals to testify as expert witnesses. Biopyschology could be utilized as a tool for looking at possibly finger prints and even looking at body fluids at the crime scene.

2/9/12
There are several parts that I found interesting and many of them also relate to psychology. I’ll discuss these parts first and then I’ll talk more about two issues/ideas that use science based on psychological research that justifies/supports their presence in the Guide. I’ll just list the items that I found most interesting and if there is a connection to psychology that description will follow.
When interviewing an eyewitness the accuracy of that information depends, in part, on the method of questioning. I think this relates to psychology in congruence with the idea of priming. People my offer subtle hints that lead a witness to answer in a specific manner. Another element of psychology is that people naturally strive for agreement; they want to be helpful. So, if an investigator (or the equivalent to) suggests or hints (consciously or subconsciously) that the witness should answer a certain way then the witness will try to answer in agreement with that.
I also found it interesting that looking at photos sequentially one at a time instead of all at once is better/more accurate. I would have thought this would be the other way around- I would have a hard time deciphering or comparing between these individuals if I could not see them side by side. Throughout the rest of the guide it talks about the witness stating in their own words their certainty of their choices. If I were a witness I would prefer to see all the photos at once as to compare and then I would give my percentage of certainty of my choices. I have a feeling if I looked at them one at a time then I would have trouble remembering the past images. I also think that trying to remember what these faces look like rather than having them in front of me would make me recall them inaccurately. Either making the current image look more or less like the memory I have the perpetrator. This is just my reasoning, it is probably wrong which makes me more interested in why seeing the images sequentially one at a time is more accurate.
The guide also states that investigators may give unintentional cues (body language, tone of voice) and that can impact the reliability of an eyewitness. In this case the investigator’s opinions, past experiences, biases etc. are influencing the witness. The witness will already be up against/fighting their own biases based on past experiences in order to come up with an accurate account of what happened during a crime and what the perpetrator (s) may look like.
While reading the five sections of the guide there are several guidelines that are heavily related and probably the result of psychological studies. For instance mug books should have images that are similar to one another and no one should stand out. That is if one image does stand out and has all of the features that describe the perpetrator then they are much more likely to be chosen. Or, if a certain perpetrator does not possess one of the qualities that was used to describe them initially (description says short hair and the perpetrator’s photos has long hair) then they will stand out in a way where a guilty man may go free.
You also do not want two or more photos to look to similarly. In this case the eyewitness may become confused and question their decision (the correct inclinations may seem inaccurate). In cases where there are multiple suspects or even perpetrators there should only be one of the suspects per lineup, again as not to over complicate things for the eyewitness.
The eyewitness should be informed of a number of things before they look at a line up (this goes for any kind of line up). They should be aware that the perpetrator may or may not be in the lineup. Either way (if their pick someone or if they do not) the investigation will continue. They should also know that be helping out with the line they are not only suggesting someone’s potential guilt but, they are also suggesting innocence for the person they did not pick. The last and very important bit of information that the eyewitness should be aware of and include with their participation in a lineup is that they should inform the investigators of their certainty with their decisions. These pieces of information will help the eyewitness’ accuracy in that they will feel less obligation in their decisions during a lineup.
I found it interesting that eyewitnesses were instructed to try and get into the frame of mind that they were in while the crime was taking place. I have also heard this about taking tests. It is easier to recall information if you are in the same state of mind that you were in while studying. This also relates to some recent discussion I have heard about new ways of testing. I have heard that it would be much more convenient for classes to have their tests outside of class time in separate buildings so that they don’t lose class time to testing. The argument for not doing this is that students will perform better on exams if they are administered in the same building/room that the information is taught in. The same may be true for recalling a crime. There will be more information available to the witness’ recollection if they are in the same state of mind as when the crime happened.
Another interest piece of information that was brought up by the Guide is that eyewitnesses are instructed that they should avoid discussing the case with the media, other eyewitness or in general people outside the investigation. This is because a person memory is very susceptible to outside influences. Our recollection may be affected if we are discussing the case and an outside source suggests something inaccurate about what happened during the crime. An example of this could be if an eyewitness is discusses what the perpetrator looked like and they are having trouble recalling the color of his car and a person in the conversation starts naming colors. If red is the first of last color they say (psychological studies suggest that we have the best recall with the first and last parts/words in a list) then that might be the color that our memory keeps and associates with the crime scene. It is completely inaccurate but our memory tells us that that is what we saw.
The final part of this reading that I found very interesting the importance of the investigator building and keeping rapport with the witness. It is important because if the witness (eyewitness) feels comfortable around the investigator then they will remember more information about the crime/situation. That is why it is important that the officer that is first on the scene and/or the first person/investigator to interview a witness build positive and strong rapport with the witness.