Eyewitness Guide

After reading Chapter 7 about eyewitness memory and the uses of eyewitness testimony, it was interesting to read over the guidelines for everything from taking the initial report to conducting any of the different types of line-ups. The guidelines provided seems to be very easy to follow and easy to understand. Much of seemed like common sense after reading what we have already on the topic of witnesses. I’m sure the guideline provides much help to those conducting interviews and handling all proceedings with witnesses.

Right of the bat, I was interested in the by the efforts the guide stated as important. In the introduction, the TWGEYEE (Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence) points out how this guide is different from those in the past. First, it is supported by research in the area of social science. From here, the guide combined perspectives from research and practical application of knowledge about witnesses and memory. The goal of the guide is to increase the accuracy of evidence provided by witnesses through professional practices.

This guide was fairly comprehensive. It not only covered what to do when interviewing the witness, it started at the very beginning of any string of events: the initial report of the crime. Dispatchers are advised on how to obtain useful information about the incident without being suggestive or leading the witness. I thought this was interesting, mainly because my mom is a dispatcher, but also because I think most people (outside of law enforcement) overlook this step. The same procedures need to be followed from the beginning. I also thought it was interesting the guide outlined how to accurately record the witnesses’ statements. Providing procedures for each step helps ensure that the information is not only accurate, but a fair portrayal of the memory of the witness. The guide also discussed many of the suggestions we talked about in class and read about in our book, such as keeping witnesses separated, encouraging them to not follow media reports about the events, and avoiding using leading questions.

It is important to have guidelines for every step of the way when it comes to dealing with witnesses. In Chapter 7, we read about all of the different things that can affect the processes involved with memory. As the message for the Attorney General stated, memory is not infallible. We all make mistakes in interpretation or recollection, even of we mean well. The procedures seemed incredibly reasonable to me. They may not be foolproof, but they provide a good starting point for those in law enforcement.

The online article “Eyewitness Evidence: A guide for law enforcement” was a very interesting read. What made it interesting was all the information that it provided about eyewitness testimony. First off, I had no idea that there was a society that was completely dedicated to the study of eyewitness testimony and the preservation of eyewitness “memory.’ The second thing that I found interesting was all the detailed procedures that law enforcement must take to make sure that memory is preserved. Another thing that I found interesting was that the article not only talked about what law enforcement should do all the way through the process of setting up the books that people looked through to indentify criminals. Also, we it talks about the collection of evidence to make sure that it isn’t skewed. This include things such how to collect evidence at a crime scene. As we have learned in chapter seven of the “Forensic and Legal Psychology” book as well as in class, memory can be skewed by law enforcement. I think that it is very beneficial that there are procedures for law enforcement to use because it will, in my opinion, lead to less skewing of eyewitness memory. The procedures themselves are very detailed. For example, the very first procedure that they talk about is when a person actually calls 911. It talks about how the operator should do things such as acquire the location of the individual, ask open ended questions, and to avoid leading or suggestive questions. These are very crucial things when it comes to dealing with the memory. As we talked about in class, memory erosion can happen to anyone. However, if a police officer asks very leading questions and avoids the use of open ended questions, this could lead to the person’s memory getting skewed. So it is very important that the police follow these things because it will allow for less memory skewing. The overall procedures because they are so detailed don’t seem like they would be that hard to put into practice. However, I can see certain situations where it would be pretty hard to do some of the things. An example of this is when the article talks about updating officers about the situation that is going on. This of course is talking about what the dispatcher should do. However, as we have talked about in class, the flow of information from the dispatcher to the officers can change. The example our teacher gave in class was the fact that she told the dispatcher that the person was wearing this certain color of clothes as well as heading west. However, when the cops finally arrived they were searching in the wrong area and were looking for someone that didn’t match the description that she gave. Stuff like this are where you can see problems in this system, however, you must take into account human error and just humans in general. If we were perfect, we wouldn’t need a procedure for dealing with eyewitnesses because we would remember it. Overall, the procedures themselves seem very reasonable. They are very detailed which makes it easier to actually put them into use. However, as I have talked about before, when it comes to the human aspect of applying the procedures, they can sometimes not be used. The reason that these procedures are so important is because they can actually help preserve memories that people have. They can also lead to more accurate descriptions of individuals and events that can lead to higher percentage of convictions; the reason being that people will remember what happened at a higher rate. Finally, they can help the legal process as a whole because it gives us guidelines to help law enforcement deal with eyewitnesses. The reason that these procedures can help the quality of evidence is because it gives law enforcement procedures to go by. These make sure that there is a standard that law enforcement can follow. This will overall benefit the system because law enforcement will be able to get better information from victims. Secondly, crime scenes will not be contaminated by police officers. Also, evidence acquired wouldn’t be contaminated. All of these things will lead to better convictions as well as more because people would be able to remember stuff better, and the quality of evidence would improve. How it can help improve the quality of evidence is that it makes rules and guidelines that the whole law enforcement could do. This would hopefully allow for the quality of evidence collected to go up because people would have a set standard of how to do something.

These procedures seemed both difficult and reasonable to me at the same time. They seem difficult because it’s hard to imagine that each person during the investigative process wouldn’t make even a small mistake that could greatly influence the outcome. This reading made it very clear that eyewitnesses go through a lot of people (911 caller, multiple officers, etc) while each time rehashing their story and their description of the suspect. Each person the eyewitness goes through has the potential to make a mistake such as asking a leading question.

It’s also hard to imagine that the eyewitness wouldn’t make a mistake during the process either. For example, witnesses are not supposed to talk to other witnesses and I can see how easily this could happen. At the same time, the procedures seemed reasonable. Obviously some kind of code needs to be in place for law enforcement persons to follow. I think these procedures are important in that they can help to reduce the likelihood that an innocent man/woman will go to prison. These procedures are based on scientific research, not just “hunches.”

A few things surprised me when reading this booklet. First, I had never really thought about the other person on the line in a 911 call. I had never given much thought to the training they must have to go through. It was interesting to learn there are certain rules they must follow such as asking open ended questions and avoid asking suggesting/leading questions. Psychologically speaking, it’s hard to imagine some of the things 911 responders hear on a daily basis. I can imagine some of these individual’s would need clinical counseling to help deal with some of the stress of their jobs.

In addition, I was surprised that witnesses should be separated and should avoid discussing the incident with other witnesses. If I were a witness to a stressful crime, especially something dramatic such as an armed robbery or murder, I would definitely want to talk to other people who were there and experienced the life-changing event with me. We can affiliate this idea with social psychology in that we want to talk to others who are similar to us and who have had similar experiences. We would want to discuss witnessing a crime with someone else that witnessed the same crime because we may feel an automatic bond.

While reading this booklet, it also opened my eyes to the people in law enforcement that we don’t hear a lot about. For example, I had never thought about the person behind the mugbook and the steps they need to take to prepare one. For example, the individual who puts together the photo book has to be careful not to choose people who look too much alike and also who don’t look alike at all. It sounds like this job would be very difficult and based off of opinion most of the time. I also found it interesting that uniformity needs be created with scars or tattoos.

Moreover, while reading this I found an interesting line that said “a comfortable witness provides more information.” This may have an aspect to do with social psychology as well in that the individual’s surroundings are set up so that they are more likely to share more information. For example, I can imagine that it may be easier to share a rape story with another woman than with a male police officer.

I think it is completely necessary to have a handbook like this one. Not only is it important that everyone knows the correct and right way to go about their specific job in a crime investigation, but also if they have a problem during an investigation, they can refer back to this handbook and hopefully find answers so everyone is on the same page and the investigation goes smoothly as possible. This handbook wasn’t written in a few days. It was written my 37 individuals from both the United States and Canada. I was happy to see so much effort go into this handbook, because of how important crime scene investigations are.
The handbook states towards the beginning “Even the most honest and objective people can make mistakes in recalling and interpreting a witnessed event; it is the nature of human memory.” This statement shows how important this handbook is and how important it is to take each crime scene investigation as serious as the last. Hopefully by following the 5 steps listed in the Eyewitness Handbook they will be able to more accurately identify the perpetrator. The 5 main steps they talk about in the book are: 1) initial report of the crime/ first responder, 2) mug books and composites, 3) procedures for interviewing the witness by the follow-up investigator, 4) field of identification procedure, and 5) procedures for eyewitnesses/ identification. Each step lists the principle, policy, and procedure that should be taken at each step in the process.
Looking through each step, to me at least, these steps don’t seem difficult at all. Most of them are self-explanatory. However, from reading in our textbook, I have learned almost anything can be used as evidence for a crime, even that chunk of cheese they talked about. So I think the most difficult part would be gathering all the possible left over evidence at the crime scene.
I learned something interesting about when you are interviewing a witness, what types of questions you should ask. In the handbook it 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 is something that I caught on with during investigative shows on TV but I never knew if that’s what they truly did or not. I think it is really important not to use leading questions, because that could definitely lead someone to recall false information.
In order to have good quality of evidence, this handbook should be followed. You can’t have one person do their job exactly like the handbook says, and another person doing it their own way. That can lead to inaccurate gathering of evidence and could result in the misidentification of a perpetrator.
While reading through the handbook, none of the procedures seemed unreasonable. They were all straight forward and most of them talk about what you would expect a crime scene investigator to do. The main idea I notice was accuracy and preciseness. People who follow this handbook have to take their jobs very seriously.

While reading the eyewitness guide I found myself applying things that I had learned in chapter seven as well as in class to justify the rules and procedures that were in place. Having the small amount of background knowledge I know have on memory I can completely understand why certain procedures need to be set in place for the sake of the witnesses memory of the event. But an issue that came to my mind is whether or not the individuals who are working in these fields follow the set procedures or if they do not fully believe that memory evidence needs to be handled with care. The individual who takes the 911 calls is usually the first person to interact with the eyewitness after the crime has occurred. In the eyewitness guide they stress the 911 dispatcher to ask the witness open ended questions such as, “ what can you tell me about the car”. This is because leading questions can contaminate the memory of the event for the witness. If the dispatcher were to ask if the car was black then the witness now has a black car in their mind and that risks them losing the memory of the actual color of the car. Other than that there were other procedures obtaining towards law that the dispatcher is to do after information is obtained. The procedure for the preliminary investigating officer is incredibly important for the eyewitnesses involved. After the officer verifies the witnesses the individual separates the witnesses from each other and tells each of them not to discuss the case with the other witnesses. This is important because their memory is easily contaminated. After hearing one of the witness’s stories it may contaminate their memory and interfere with what they can remember and the validity of that memory. The procedures set in place for sketch artists are also incredibly important for witness when developing a composite sketch. They need to make sure they don’t put any images in the eyewitness’s head that may interfere with their ability to recollect the face of the perpetrator. This needs to be done because this will be the face the investigators will be looking for so they need to be certain they are not doing anything that will interfere with the witnesses picture of the criminal. All the procedures that are mentioned in this guide are to protect the witnesses memory because it is an incredibly important piece of evidence and the investigators need to be incredibly careful to not put thoughts into their head. The information gathered from the eyewitness needs to be as reliable as possible. The information gathered from the individuals that witnessed the crime is incredibly persuasive, so it’s important to make sure their memory of the event is handled with care.

These guidelines go with the chapter about eyewitnesses, and they are fairly straightforward. Eyewitnesses are very important to a case, even though some have a track record for being wrong. Eyewitnesses have to go through a long process of interrogation, and many times that means having to tell their story over and over again. First beginning with the dispatcher, which asks very simple questions but is not a professional as an investigator on the case. The story that the dispatcher and the next person hear could be two different stories. TWGEYEE created the guide so that these issues wouldn’t happen. They created the steps for the collection and the preservation of eyewitness testimonies.

The eyewitnesses mind can be fragile and the guide can prevent some of the errors from happening. The guide wants to improve the validity, the amount of information received, and the strength of the information through the justice system. I like how the guide is based off research and can always change and improve based on what works best for preserving the information that eyewitnesses disclose. The guide talks about how there is room for change in the future, the guide says that sequential patterns work better for line ups in producing better results, however it does not state which method sequential or simultaneous lineups are preferred. There are also problems that can be avoided by law enforcers; they need to not provide “cues” to the eyewitness, whether it is tone of voice or body language. The way to prevent these sorts of interferences could be blind procedures where the investigator does not know who the actual suspect is in the case. This procedure is not mentioned in the guide, but they are the future for investigators to improve eyewitness testimonies and eyewitness reliability. The “beyond reasonable doubt” comes into play with eyewitness testimonies because they need to be very sure that the suspect is actually the person who committed the crime, and with investigators interfering with this that kind of makes proving this really hard.

As I mentioned earlier the dispatcher is the first to hear any information about the crime and descriptions of the scene. The dispatcher needs to make sure they do not ask leading questions, but they ask open ended questions leaving the eyewitness to describe all that they see in their own words. The dispatcher then needs to tell all information to the police officer that is coming to the scene, making sure to tell the eyewitness that the police are on their way. I think being a dispatcher would be a very hard job, and it puts them in a tough position because what if they do not get enough information and police are too late. I did end up looking up some recordings of dispatchers and it was interesting to listen because they always remain calm no matter what they are hearing over the phone. This is the first information that is heard about the case and it determines accuracy for the eyewitness’s testimonies. Investigating the physical evidence is also mentioned in the guide and is done by the preliminary officer at the scene. It is their job to make sure that all evidence is collected, the perpetrator is arrested, and witnesses are identified for further investigation. Written and spoken testimonies need to be taken by all witness and all witnesses need to be kept separate to avoid the confusing of information. As the book and the guide says all parties involved with eyewitnesses need to avoid asking leading questions about the incident.

Another way that investigators can get a lead in the case is from the mug book, they also have a set of procedures in the guide to follow. They need to make sure characteristics are similar in all persons in the mug book and they also need to make sure size and colors of the photos are the same. The main focus of the mug book should not point out one person, only one picture of each person should be in the mug book to avoid confusion. All procedures in line up the investigator needs to make sure that the eyewitness is not being lead to believe something different, they also need to know that the perpetrator may not be in the lineup. Comfortable witnesses in interviews will volunteer more information, this also shows that they are more competent and are not in high stress about the situation blocking their memory from what actually happened. The investigator needs to be very careful in interviews not to interrupt the witness and come to the interview prepared from the information received about the case. The guide says that investigators holding the interview need to properly record the evidence on recordings and written, which basically is a contract that can be used in court with their testimony.

In actually line-ups fillers should be selected (at least 5) that resemble the suspect, but not so closely that they could be confused with the suspect. I believe that this is mainly where eyewitnesses have trouble, because with similar faces and characteristics there could be a person misidentified and convicted. They should not make the suspect stand out and should let the witness know that the suspect may not be in the line-up. I believe that all the guidelines are easy to understand and are necessary for the procedure of protecting eyewitness testimonies. I think all of the future research needs to be done because what they mentioned for future guidelines make sense, such as the blind investigator. I think these should be helping the justice system make eyewitnesses more reliable.

A lot of what we read in this guide was covered in class the other day. A lot of it though can be linked (in my opinion) to behavioral psychology. Ill point out as I go through it what areas are linked to behavioral psychology. (abb. Will B.P.)
So one of the first things a witness will possibly have to do is talk to a dispatcher at 9-11. Now depending on the situation can depend a lot on how that phone call goes. Regardless though Dispatch is going to ask you some questions in regard to the situation and ask you certain key things such as what does the culprit look like, what are they driving etc. These will be open ended questions as they don’t want to sway you to one answer(B.P.) Because if someone asks you a leading question it can sway your mind to think that that is what you saw. Now if the crime is going on this phonecall can actually be distracting as I would imagine it would take away your focus from the culprit and you wouldn’t be able to encode information as well since you would be multitasking (personal opinion). Lastly the dispatcher will tell you that police are on their way and reassure you that everything will be fine, which will calm you down hopefully and let you think more concisely(B.P.)
Next thing that happens is the Prelim Inv. Officer will arrive. Its his job to make sure none of the evidence gets contaminated and to start collecting said evidence. After separating the witnesses(reasons for this so they don’t consolidate information, make threats, or come up with a story together) the officer will question each one. He will also make sure those eye witnesses are safe. Now again the officer will use open ended questions so as not to influence the eyewitness. They are going to document any information the eyewitness has to offer. Also they will advise the witness to not report anything to the media, and to contact them if they remember anything or have any other information.
Now after the witness has shared their information the first time the officers will go back and make a mug book. A book full of suspects that match the description, or if there is no despriction, past criminals that match that kind of crime. Now the way the mug book is set up is another form of behavioral psychology. It will be set up so that nothing sticks out. All photos on a page will have similar looking individuals, black/white or color, size. Etc. That way nothing will influence the witness from picking a random picture on a hunch.
Another thing that could happen is a composite sketch. This is a good way for other people other than the witness to visualize the perp. That way if anyone recognizes them they can report it as well as they can search for that kind of person and narrow it down a bit.
Now when the witness views the mug book a few things need to happen. The witness needs to be alone so they cant be swayed one way or another (b.p) Then they will look through the book and try to pick out the perp. If they can. If they know the person they may already have a photo but if not then they may find one in here. Now the officer will document how sure (if one is selected) the witness at the time. Because by trial they will be “100% sure”
Now the police or investigators will do an official interview. Before the interview they should make sure that the witness is comfterable and able to share their story. None of the questions they ask should sway the witness one way or another, and the officer shouldn’t even go into that much detail about the investigation, instead relying on the information from the witness to come freely. Also tell the witness not to guess. If they can draw or make a representation of something that is encouraged. Also officers shouldn’t interrupt the witness lest they forget something. Again the witness will be advised not to talk to other witnesses about it, or the media.
The officer will then assess the interview one point at a time and make sure that what the witness said can be credible or how sure the witness was. Its important to do this at a point by point method, because while a witness may be unsure about one thing doesn’t mean they are about everything.
Now if they have a suspect in jail, they can ask the witness to come and identify them. However they should be advised that while this person may be a suspect that doesn’t mean they are the actual perp. (B.P.) The officer will then record anything that was said and done during the show up. Another similar idea is the lineup. A lineup should be set up with all individuals as reasonable witnesses(match the description, prior arrests in the area of crime, etc.) Also the witness should be advised that the perp may not be in the lineup at the time. All of this will be recorded as well as how sure the witness was at the time of the identification.

Now with all that in mind none of it really surprised me as we went over most of it in class. I don’t really think they are difficult. Most of it is either common sense or something that you would do so often that you have it down really quickly(like recording, and instructing the witnesses). All of this is important because it all helps validate the witnesses information and make sure it’s the best information possible. That way the information wont get skewed or swayed at all. It will help lead to more convictions of the actual perps and less wrongful accusations. Its also important from a psychological standpoint to understand that at any step of this process certain things can happen to the memory of the witness. I would include in this guide to make sure that the witness isn’t taking any drugs, alcohol or any other impairing substance as that could break down the links to the memory even after it happened. Its something that hasn’t been mentioned yet in class or in the guide but I would think it would be important. Its also important from a psychological standpoint to research and understand the processes that a witness goes through to encode the memories and store them. That way anyone asking or attaining the information from them can do so in a way that gets the best information out of them and cuts down on swayed thoughts or half guesses from the witness. Also I believe that they should get the information from the witnesses right away and record it. They shouldn’t ask them to tell the story over and over again for several reasons. 1. If they forget a detail or switch it later even if its minor it could throw the credibility of the witness out the window. 2. When you ask a witness several times to recount their story certain points gets fuzzier and fuzzier each time, while uncertainties at first may become 100% in their mind over time. An example of this will be last year when I had my issues with a professor. I got asked multiple times to tell my story, and a few weeks ago I was asked again. Now certain things that I remembered half a year ago I probably had forgotten, but things that were asked of me multiple times or that were talked about more in the news I could remember a lot easier.

All in all there are many things we can still do to improve eyewitness accounts, but as of right now its not a horrible method of collecting evidence.

The first thing I noticed while reading the "Guide" was how much effort they put into documenting the selection process and criteria for who wrote it. Although I felt it was a little excessive, it definitely shows how thorough this group was and how well represented it was from professionals of the United States and Canada, including researchers, lawyers, and other criminal justice personnel. The intro seemed valid to me, as they explained their purpose in composing these guidelines were to better equip the criminal justice system in obtaining eyewitnesses and making sure that their testimony was valid. As we saw in chapter 7 and as described in the introduction, even the most reliable and competent of eyewitnesses can identify the wrong person based on several factors. After much introduction of the committee and the purpose, I finally got to the guide portion. It was comical, as I found myself comparing the guidelines to how I see officers in my favorite crime television shows perform interviews with witnesses. The "Guide" started with how 911 dispatchers should handle the initial contact with witnesses throughout the 911 call. It then went to how officers should carry themselves and act when coming into contact with witnesses for the first time, and then when interviewing and staying in contact with these witnesses. I found these reasonable, with exception to a few items. In several lists of guidelines for officers, it said that they should coach the witnesses to not speak with other witnesses or the media. i find this unrealistic because I think a lot of the problem with witness contamination can be contributed to this. The witnesses either want to support each other or get each others' take on the situation, especially if they are second guessing their own opinion. I also found the portion in regards to the line-up process seeming quite difficult as well. One portion stated that the line-up should include the suspect with people who look like he or she, but not too much alike so that the witness couldn't tell them apart. This seems subject to opinion to me, and I don't think this criteria was thorough enough. Also, I believe it would be hard to find 4 or 5 people in a small area who matched the description of the suspect, especially if there were scars and tattoos considered. Minus my opinion listed above, I believe the "Guide" grants a great listing of the do's and don't's of eyewitness testimony. Officers are instructed on how to build rapport with the witnesses, and which questions to ask. I especially appreciated the committee's coaching of using only open ended questions first and then leading into more specific questions, only if they aren't suggestive in any manner. In closing, i am very appreciative to the government for assembling this committee fairly and from all over the country to get a national concensus. I am also thankful for our nation's justice system and that they do all they can to make sure the correct suspects are being identified and lower the number of people who are falsely accused.

The eyewitness guide really puts everything from chapter 7 of the textbook into perspective. The guide begins by stating that there are issues with eyewitnesses and the evidence they bring and that it is noted by the legal system, although it is an enormously useful type of evidence that cannot be ruled out even with its flaws. The beginning of the guide also points out major things about this specific guide, which was created by the NIJ and TWGEYEE, which are different from past efforts. They include that the guide is supported by social science research, which from lectures and readings we know is crucial when using eyewitnesses’ evidence and testimonies, it combines research and practical perspectives, does not flow from fear of misconduct, promotes accuracy in eyewitness evidence, and that it promotes sound professional practices. The guide also discusses the new goals, which are to increase the amount of information taken from witnesses through improved interviewing techniques, heightened validity and accuracy of eyewitness evidence as police and other work with witnesses, and to improve the criminal justice system’s ability to evaluate the strength/accuracy of eyewitnesses evidence, which from chapter seven specifically we know that these things need to be extremely accurate to get solid and effective information from eyewitnesses.
Procedures for section one of the guide includes the call-taker/dispatcher, the preliminary investigating officer, and obtaining information from the witnesses. These are the first steps for gathering eyewitness information and contact with witnesses, which can be the most crucial in how to not contaminate their memories of the events. Teaching the first people that contact the witnesses about how their memories work and how to deal with them will greatly improve their ability to be eyewitnesses in a court of law or in regards to line-ups and mug shots. The first responders must only ask open-ended questions and gather as much information they can without contaminating their memories, this is an easy procedural step but will greatly preserve the quality of evidence they collect. The second procedural section discusses mug books and composites. This teachers professionals how to set up and categorize photographs, how to set up a composite without showing or talking about any suspects, instructing witnesses and raising their comfort levels, and documenting the procedure. These are all more tactical procedures, but again, would be easy to accomplish with the right training and the importance of the preservation of evidence kept in mind. Section three goes over procedures for interviewing the witnesses with followup investigators. This includes pre-interview preparations, initial contact with the witness, conducting the interview, recording witness recollections, assessing accuracy, and maintaining contact with the witness. These are all more tactical procedures that take much more skill to accomplish, especially conducting the actual interview. Unfortunately we know that many of these interviews are not done by professionals or by people who have any regards for keeping eyewitness evidence uncontaminated. These are crucial steps towards using eyewitness accounts to catch perpetrators that need to be learned and practiced although they are practical and necessary when done correctly. Section four discusses field identification procedures and includes conducting showups, and recording showup results. The procedural safeguards put in place in these steps helps towards making sure any identifications or non-identifications made by an eyewitness are useful towards investigations and can be difficult but should be learned and implemented. The fifth section of the guide includes procedures for eyewitness identification of suspects. These areas have the most instructions because they can end up being the most crucial and as we know from class can lead to either the right or wrong person being found guilty. Composing lineups, instructing witnesses before viewing the lineups, conducting the identification procedure, and recording identification results are all included in this section and can take the most effort to do correctly.
This guide is extremely important to the obtaining and preservation of eyewitness evidence. The procedures listed teach members of the criminal justice system how to do their jobs while preserving evidence. Instructing people to use only open-ended questions, conducting lineups without pressuring or leading on witnesses, recording information correctly and efficiently, and making sure first-responders know their duty are all crucial to how eyewitnesses can stay accurate and recall their memories of the crime. We know that eyewitnesses are an infallible key to finding many perpetrators guilty but that they can also put some people in jail for crimes that they did not commit. The people that handle the witnesses need to have the right procedures and tools to keeping eyewitness evidence intact. All of the procedures seem extremely reasonable with the right training and practice.

Eyewitness accounts are such a tricky part of the investigation process. From what we’ve read in both the textbook and this guide, it seems like there is so much room for error when collecting this data, which is why all of these meticulous steps seem completely reasonable to me. Although it is impossible to completely isolate the eyewitness to preserve their memory of the crime, the steps in this guide try to minimize estimator variable impact, unconscious transference, etc. And it’s not necessarily that these procedures are difficult, it’s that there are so many steps to remember and little things that never would have occurred to me until reading this.

One example of this that I found interesting and wanted to discuss: not letting eyewitnesses discuss the crime. It seems obvious now that I’ve read it, but as an investigator, I feel like this never would’ve occurred to me. Relating to psychology, I feel like this contributes to the post-identification feedback effect. Basically, like in Courage Under Fire, eyewitnesses can feed off of each others’ stories, essentially unconsciously altering their own, which affects the accuracy of their account.

Another important part of this process is the guide’s repeated warnings to not ask biased questions. I related this right back to psychology right away in both the text and Courage Under Fire. In the movie, Sterling’s interview involved extremely biased questions, so I witnessed how these can affect an interview. In the book, I attributed this to two textbook terms: unconscious transference and system variables. I feel like asking an eyewitness, “Was the car red?” could definitely lead to unconscious transference. Putting the image of a red car in their mind could make them subconsciously put it in the crime scene, flawing their memory. Further, this leads to cognitive dissonance, which is their subconscious convincing itself that they did, in fact, see a red car, now that they’ve confirmed it with investigators. Second, these closed or open ended interview questions are examples of system variables, or variables in the investigation that can be controlled by the justice system.

Lastly, I wanted to discuss the importance of every single step in this process. From the original 911 call to the courtroom testimony, the eyewitness’ memory is constantly being affected by both internal and external factors. The steps discussed in this guide help prevent things like unconscious transference, system variable/estimator variable effects, and cognitive dissonance. Following these steps will give investigators the highest quality and most accurate eyewitness evidence, which can make or break a case.

I thought it was interesting to read about the processes involved in this Eyewitness Guide. This guide provides detailed information, beginning with taking the initial 911 and ending with identifying the suspects. This guide makes it clear how important it is not to contaminate the memories of the witnesses. In almost every step they have, they discuss ways to help with the witnesses’ memory of the crime that has taken place.
This guide begins by talking about the basics of eyewitnesses, which is interesting because like we learned while reading the book, eyewitnesses can be wrong. This guide explains how no matter whom the witness is they can be subject to mistakes in their memory, no matter how hard they try to get it right. That is one of the most important things to remember when dealing with eyewitnesses.
The first section of the guide talks about taking the 911 call. The guide provides a lot of details that I had not thought about before, that make a difference in taking the call. It is important for the dispatcher to ask open ended questions, but it is even more important for them to ask questions, in which they do not give any information that could affect the memories of the witness. We all know that if someone asks a question like “Was the house green?” no matter how hard we try to remember what color the house was we will keep picturing a green house because it was suggested. The power of suggestion is a strong tool that can impact the accuracy of our detailed memory.
The next section that was given in this guide was about investigating the scene. The most important thing I noticed from this section was that the officers are supposed to keep the witnesses separate, and encourage them not to discuss their memories of the crime with other witnesses. This is an important step because if they discuss what they remember from the crime it can have a part in what the other witnesses “remember”. They might say they remember something that they actually just heard from another witness and never saw at all.
The next section was about compiling the mug book. This section is where they compile mug shots in order to help find possible suspects. I think an important part of this section is that they have to keep all of the mug shots looking similar. If they make any of the mug shots stand out from the others, than that might be the one that holds the most attention by the witness, and therefore, might be the one they “remember seeing” when in actuality they just remember their picture standing out from the rest because it had a different background.
Another section was the lineup. I thought an interesting thing about this section that I had never known, was that they only place one suspect in each lineup, and the rest are just “fillers” to make sure the witness can identify the suspect. It is important that there are at least five fillers.
I do not think the procedures seem too difficult. I think they seem like practical instructions for all crimes that take place. By following these instructions they are making it more likely that the witnesses will remember the traits of the perpetrator and the scene better. I think it is important how they do not influence the opinions of the witnesses in any way by making suggestions and asking open-ended questions.

First off, this guide was incredibly detailed and I think that it provides us with a lot of useful and necessary information for eyewitness identification. As a whole, the procedures are made a lot easier to follow because each of them are equipped with a part entitled principle, policy, procedure, and summary. Breaking them down into these smaller parts will help greatly with understanding each step and how to perform them properly (the summary specifically will be very helpful because it will give a little synopsis of what it’s section discussed, just in case there were to be any confusion). They also each give numbered steps on how to conduct the procedures and in what order. A lot of people are able to learn a lot easier when the steps are right in front of them to follow and this will make the room for error in helping to identify witnesses much smaller. To make things even more user friendly, the guide breaks down each section into A’s, B’s and so on. Bunching everything under one large section without subsections would make for a very complicated guide. I think the wording of the procedures is also very user friendly. You don’t see them throwing around large words that people might potentially not understand. If it weren’t for all of the above aspects making this guide easier to follow and understand, I definitely think that you would be dealing with a lot more complicated and difficult to understand manual. All in all, the guide and its procedures are not complicated or difficult at all. They are all necessary for this topic and I think any capable and qualified human could perform them.

As far as reasonableness goes, I definitely think that the steps they decided to include in this guide are very reasonable and are attainable by the reader. I think that they chose very useful procedures and steps to include and I do not think the process would be as smooth and successful if they were to leave any of the current parts out. And again with the user friendliness of the manual itself, it makes the steps very easy to understand which in turn helps make them even more reasonable for the reader. If you were to sit down and read this guide like we have, the five main sections would seem to flow very nicely together and help the reader fully understand why each step is necessary and how to perform them properly and in a reasonable manner. It may seem overboard at times, but it is always important to remember that a guide of this magnitude requires a lot of time and effort and these things are bound to lead to success for the reader.

The procedures in the guide are important simply because they were designed to help law enforcement be able to handle eyewitness evidence in the best possible way. There are so many ways to corrupt any physical evidence you may have as a law enforcement officer and eye witness evidence is no different. There are strict policies and steps that need to be taken in order to get the most accurate eye witness evidence you possibly can from a witness and this specific guide does a very nice job of putting together a very informative instruction manual of sorts in order to yield the best possible results. Eyewitness evidence should be treated no differently than physical evidence. It is just as important and can be contaminated just the same. These procedures can help preserve the quality of eyewitness evidence because there are so many detailed steps involved. The more steps there are to try and make the evidence accurate and reliable, the better the chances are of keeping the quality of the evidence at its best. If you have a guide with lots of steps and directions on how to complete these said steps, then the quality of the evidence is bound to be better than if you did not have these options.

The Eyewitness Guide seems like a very useful tool for investigators. The guide immediately establishes the reason for its existence and why it is a trusted source. It makes an effort to explain how much research has been done over the years and how it has contributed to making the guide as effective as possible in ensuring the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. I wasn’t aware that there was a society of professionals devoted to studying the subject of eyewitness testimony, called the Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence.

None of the procedures in the guide seem difficult. All of the procedures seem very reasonable and for the most part, common sense. The procedures make sure to point out how easy it is to contaminate a witness memory or as a leading question. The example that the guide uses multiple times for this is asking “what color was the car” as opposed to “was the car red?”, which is a leading question. The majority of the procedures seem to primarily focus on not leading the witness and accurately recording their testimony, in their own words.

Section 1 deals with the initial report of the crime to the 911 operator and how the first responding investigator should deal with the witness upon arriving at the scene. This section advises what the rest of the guide does in terms of not asking suggestive or leading questions. It also notes that the officer should separate witnesses from each other and ensure that they don’t discuss the details of the crime. This is due to the possibility that the witnesses with contaminate their memories of the event due to cognitive dissonance/post-identification feedback. Section 1 ends discussing how the officer should collect and record information about the event from the witnesses. It mainly restates the importance of not asking leading questions and also states the importance of accurately documenting witness responses. This is important because testimony can become distorted by the officer or the witness themselves if care isn’t taken to accurately record the initial report.

Section 2 deals with how mug books and composites should be presented. This section spends much of its time trying to ensure that the mug books and composites aren’t biased. It states that mug books should be grouped according to their format so that no pictures stand out from the rest. This is important because it may lead the witness to choose the photo that stands out, believing that it is because they recognize the person as the perpetrator. It also states the importance of only having one photo of each person in the book, most likely for the same reason. Another thing that this section addresses is the importance of presenting the mug book/composites in an environment that minimizes distractions for the witness. The rest of the section is spent restating the importance of accurately documenting the witness response.

Section 3 deals with how a follow-up investigator should handle interviewing the witness. This section, again states the importance of accurately recording the information given by the witness and not asking any leading questions. It also says to review previously attained information to see if the witness response is the same. The section stresses the importance of encouraging the witness to volunteer any information, no matter how trivial it may seem, without directly prompting them. This is likely due to not wanting to lead the witness and possibly contaminate their memory as they struggle to remember every detail. The section actually explicitly states to caution the witness not to guess any details. During the interview, the investigator is also cautioned not to interrupt the witness while they are recounting the event. After the interview is concluded, the witness should also be encouraged to contact investigators if they remember anything else and avoid discussing the event with the media or other witnesses. This is due to the possibility of the media or other witnesses contaminating the memory of the event, possibly by asking leading questions or again due to cognitive dissonance/post-identification feedback.

Section 4 deals with conducting a showup. This section is fairly short and mainly just restates the previous advice of not leading the witness on or having a biased showup. It also stresses the importance of keeping witnesses separate again and telling the witness that the person they are looking at may or may not be the perpetrator.

Section 5 deals with the procedures for eyewitness identification of suspects, specifically on how photo and live lineups should be conducted. This section, again, states the importance of non-biased lineups and not asking any leading questions. It also deals with the distinctions between simultaneous and sequential lineups, stressing the importance that witnesses be shown individuals one at a time and in random order for sequential lineups. This is likely to reduce bias again. It is also stressed that the witness be given as much time as necessary to view the lineups. This section also seems to deal with the importance of eliminating the possibility of post-identification feedback effect. It stresses that if the witness identifies a suspect, the investigator should avoid reporting any prior information regarding the person that they selected from the lineup. The section also recommends that the lineup be documented with video that accurately records and represents the lineup fairly.

Overall, this guide seems very easy to understand. This is mainly due to how clearly the guidelines are stated and how most of the procedures are based on common sense. I feel that it does a good job ensuring that witnesses aren’t lead on, that the investigation isn’t biased, and that all of the information obtained from witnesses at every step in the process is accurately documented.

We read in chapter seven that eyewitness can help in investigations, but in the past they have not always been reliable. I’ve often wondered how many people were put on death row or even put to death because of misidentification and poor evidence handling. In this reading it not only give us policies and procedures on how to make eyewitness evidence better, but talks about possible future advancements that could make it even better. Of course it is extremely important to get the evidence as fast as you can, because the long you wait the greater the chance that the witness forgets important details. The Guide is great example of how investigations has changed over the past few years and bring in different views of people. Guide is the first time we see a combination of social science and different parts of the criminal justice system to develop procedures and policies to make evidence better.
These procedures are very easy to understand and are very reasonable to follow when it comes to handling witness evidence. After reading these policies they details when it comes to handling a single witness. The investigator must keep the witness as comfortable as possible throughout the case and make sure they stories don’t get mixed up with others. When the call first comes in the dispatcher must do whatever to keep the witness calm and still get enough details to help police figure out what to do when they get on scene. One key thing that I got out of this reading was not to ask any leading questions. If you put an idea into a witness head then that’s all they can think of and that can change their story completely. For the investigator it’s extremely important to build a connection with the witness. People are always more willing to talk to others if they are more comfortable with them and the more comfortable a witness is the more they are willing to work with you. It’s also very important not to overwhelm the witness with a lot of pictures and questions. The mug book is a great way to get an identity fast, but keeping the pictures separate by certain characteristics is key in any interview. Showing witness lots of pictures can confuse and possible mix up the details of what they remember about the criminal. Conducting a second interview by anther investigator is great way to back up the evidence and possible see if the story changes at all. It’s possible the witness can remember more details the more they think about it. The investigator should make sure they talk about the case to other people or the media, because they could hear details that could change their story. If more than one witness the evidence should be documented to help create a whole picture of the situation. Can also see if the stories all match, can find out what witnesses are telling the truth. I plan to go into law enforcement as a career, so reading this gives me a better understanding of how to handle a witness.

From what I learned in chapter seven about the importance of gathering accurate eyewitness testimony can easily be related to the eyewitness guide. I think this guide goes into great detail about how a investigator should properly and accurately go about gathering eyewitness testimony and other evidence. Eyewitness testimony is sometimes even more reliable than DNA evidence. This eyewitness guide is basically common sense on how evidence should be gathered.

The eyewitness guide is a very useful tool to investigators out there. It establishes a solid core for its existence and that it is a very trustable source. The guide even clearly states in the introduction that if the procedures mentioned , if consitently applied, will tend to increase the accuracy and reliability of the eyewitness evidence. The guide points out just how easy it is to contaminate evidence, especially when gathering eyewitness testimony. The main goal it not to lead a eyewitness to their statement but help guide them into giving all the right information.

Section one of the eyewitness guide deals with the initial reporting of the crime. It expalins how a 9-1-1 call taker should obtain and disseminate a nonsuggestive manner to get complete and accurate information from the caller. I feel this procedure is right on because you don't want to jepoardize the safety of the caller and you don't want to contaminate the entire investigation. Another part of section one establishes the importance of obtaining information from the eyewitness. As we know from previous discussion in class and from chapter seven in our textbook, the information from a eyewitness has direct impact on the amount of accuracy of that information and the entire investigation all together. When questionin the eyewitness, you want to stray away from asking any leading questions like 'Was the car red?' because now that will be all the witness can picture the car as. It tampers with their memory process and now the investigation is tampered with.

This guide also goes into great detail about setting up line ups, for line ups enable the witness to provide a more accurate identification of the culprit, or even innocents. This guide suggests that the investigators should separate the witnesses and question them separately because that is another major way key information can be misunderstood and tampered with.

Overall, this eyewitness guide is pretty easy to understand and has great reliability for investigators. It helps regulate how an investigator should go about gathering accurate information from eyewitnesses to successfuly solve a case.

After reading the previous chapter we now know just how important an eyewitness account can be. We also know that eyewitness accounts can often be inaccurate and lead to wrongful convictions. Sometimes however, it is not the fault of the eyewitness, but of the legal system and the methods of the interviewers. This guide sets the procedures in dealing with eyewitness reports in a way that does not bias or influence their accounts of the crime.

The first section is about the initial and first responder. This is often 911 dispatch and the end up having the most effect on eyewitness accounts because it is the first encounter for the witness. The guide stresses the importance of open ended questions and avoiding suggestive and misleading questions in order to obtain and preserve the max information from the crime scene.

The second section is over mugbooks and composites. When preparing a mugbook, investigators use pictures of previously arrested people in a way that is not suggestive. Composite images are that from the eyewitness's memory. In this section it is important to provide proper instructions to the witness.

The third section entails procedures for the interview of the witness by follow up investigators. Here it is important to first prepare for the interview by going over the case information. Again it is vital to not be suggestive as to bias or corrupt the eyewitness account It also stresses a psychological term of developing a good rapport, or relationship, with the witness because a comfortable witness provides more information. During the interview it is also important to record everything, so afterward you can assess the accuracy and maintain contact with the witness.

The final two sections are about procedures for field identification and eyewitness identification of suspects. Here are the guidelines of making proper lineups, whether they be live lineups of pictures. It is important to compose a line up so that the suspect does not unduly stand out.

After going through this guide the procedures do not seem to be too difficult. They are reasonable and important to help preserve the quality of the evidence collected. Is is important to have a set of guidelines so that the investigator stays out of they process as much as possible so as to not bias or affect the eyewitness account. The guide stresses multiple times the importance of using open ended questions to avoiding suggestive or misleading statements. It also stresses the importance of a good rapport with the witness. The statement that a comfortable witness provides more information is very important because you want the most information that a witness can tell you on their own.

I think when reading the procedures they do not seem very hard, but it could be like easier said than done. The first procedure was about the being a dispatcher, I felt like this was probably one of the easiest procedures to follow. This to me seems easier because there is a script that you should follow and when answering calls that are coming in more than once a day the procedure should be easier to remember. I do believe that when dealing with the rest of the eyewitness procedures they tend to seem harder. When dealing with an eyewitness there are a lot of procedures that need to be followed in order to make sure no memory has been influenced in a certain way. You have to be cautious of what you ask question and how you create a fair lineup. When it comes to eyewitness testimony there is no room for error because one mistake, or if you are leading the witness all evidence, the eyewitness testimony, can be thrown out of court. So I believe that these procedures are difficult with the thought, time and effort that need to be put into them. These procedures do seem reasonable, they seem fair to me. These procedures are made to be sure no eyewitness’s testimony can be corrupted. According to the book “mistaken identification played a role in 76% of cases where wrongly convicted persons were released…” I think this is one of the main reasons all of these procedures were created, we do not want an innocent man going to jail, and more than that we do not want the criminal to run free allowing him, or her, to commit another crime. So these rules were put into place to allow eyewitness’s to give an accurate account to what happened and who did it. These procedures are to make sure the eyewitness memory has not been altered or influence in any way. The procedures can help preserve the quality of evidence because they make sure to get the most accurate memory out of the eyewitness. On many of the procedures it was said to make sure to explain to the witness that they do not talk to the media or any of the other witnesses. This procedure is important and valuable to the procedure because if a witness talks to other witness, witness #2, the witness starts seeing some of the witness #2 was describing altering the witnesses memory and recollection of what they original saw. According to the book this is called retrieval inhibition, which is you can only focus on what you have been told and not the event itself. The officers dealing with these procedures also have to be aware of the feelings and emotions of the eyewitness; they make sure the witness is able to describe what happened without emotions getting in the way. When talking with the witnesses the officers have to make sure to record in detail everything that is said, felt and heard. They do this to make sure they are doing a proper investigation, following the procedures; they had to write down the feelings of the eyewitness to later decide if the eyewitness was in a functional state. Then they make sure that when putting all of the evidence all together, is current throughout the investigation. The main purpose of the procedures is to make sure they get the most accurate description of what took place and what the eyewitnesses saw.

Eyewitness evidence can be detrimental to providing a suspect to a crime and the possible conviction The eyewitness to the crime needs to be handled with just as much care and safeguards as the material evidence found at the crime scene. In many cases the eyewitness testimony can be more important to a case than the material evidence. In stating that, handling an eyewitness to a crime is a detailed and throe process that must last from initial contact, till weeks after the crime was witnessed.
The eyewitness guide lay out multiple procedures and suggested policy’s for dealing with an eyewitness. These policy’s and procedures are suggested and not required my departments; in my opinions they should be required. This Eyewitness Guide had compiled multiple opinions and facts from experts in the fields of investigators, law enforcement, courts, etc. The knowledge these experts obtained from years of experience with eyewitness's and there collection of evidence. These individual deal with eyewitness evidence collection on a weekly bases and their knowledge should be trusted.
Do these procedures and policies laid out in the guide seem difficult or over the top? Not to me. As I've stated in previously blogs dealing with the collection of evidence in pursuit of justice; we can never do to much to make sure justice is served where it is due. This argument can go both way. With increased attention to detail when dealing with evidence of any type there will be less mistakes and a better quality of evidence will be collected. This is especially true when dealing with the eyewitness evidence coming from another individual. The psychology and mental state of the witness can easily be contaminated, whether it be the 911 dispatcher, multiple officer contact, conversation with other witnesses, etc. They mental knowledge and memory of the eyewitness is something the investigators must protect and document just as detailed as the rest of the crime scene.
All of these procedures are very reasonable in my opinion. As stated numerous times in the Eyewitness Guide, the importance of security, health, and contact with the eyewitness is extremely important. This seems like common sense; the individual must be treated with respect and given the means to be comfortable. In return the investigators and officers can expect to receive the best quality of information on the crime, perpetrators, getaway vehicle, etc. The quality of those memories and details will be much more beneficial if the eyewitness is comfortable and removed from any stressful situation. This is simply psychology at work.
Relating to psychology and why it it important to collect quality evidence from a eyewitness. The psychology of the eyewitness will continue to change from the initial crime till weeks later. As stated in the guide it is very important for the investigating officer to establish rapport with the witness. This rapport will develop a sense of security and relation between the witness and the officer. Limiting stress and providing comfortable means to give a statement will increase the quality of evidence and memory provided. Opened questions are also important in the investigation. The officer will receive much more honest, truthful answers from an open ended question instead of using a leading questions to provide quick answers. An open ended question will allow the eyewitness to think back to the crime and use there memory trace to honestly describe the incident—leading to a better quality of evidence collected. As I mention earlier, the eyewitness's psychology and memory will change as time continues after the crime. This is where it is important for the officer to establish trust and rapport with that individual along with providing means for contacting the officer is new information is remembered. It is very common for a eyewitness to remember parts of the crime weeks later when his or her memory is “jogged”. This new information could be essential to the case and the possible conviction.
In conclusion, the importance of collecting quality evidence from an eyewitness can not be over emphasized The policies and procedures may seem over bearing but when put into the context of providing Justice for a criminal act, it is never to much. The psychology of the eyewitness can also have a significant impact on the quality of evidence collected. Keeping all of these factors in mind, it is critical the investigating officer or anyone who comes in contact with the eyewitness, provides the proper security and rapport with that individual; in hopes of preventing evidence contamination and producing a better quality of evidence.

The Guide was produced by 34 professional individuals who were called The Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. This group is made up of content-area experts from across the United States and Canada. They made up regulations and rules for others to follow by so there will be less mistakes in the future. I do not think that the rules they set up are hard at all, they are very straight forward and reasonable. I also thought it was great that they did step by step procedures and it even started with the dispatcher taking the 911 report. While reading the guide there were many things that I could understand about why they did what they did because of my knowledge after reading chapter seven in the book forensic and legal psychology. For example in conduct E. “Assessing the Accuracy of Individual Elements of a Witness’ Statement” The investigator is to review the individual elements of the witness’ statement to determine the accuracy of each point. It’s a good thing to review their story point by point because their cognitive devolvement of the event may not be all there. Eyewitness may remember more things than others such as focusing in on a weapon than the perpetrators face, which is known as weapon focus effect.
I thought that the message from the attorney general hit the nail on the head. One of his quotes was “Even the most honest and objective people can make mistakes in recalling and interpreting a
witnessed event; it is the nature of human memory.” Memory is a tricky thing to work with because there are a lot of components to it such as memory trace, encoding, storage, and retrieval, cross-race effect, etc.
After reading this guide I found out that there are a lot of guidelines needed to follow, and if you mess up on some of those guidelines then you may be putting the wrong person behind bars. This guide was made to reduce mistakes and give individuals a foundation to help them with their duties.
Key Terms- memory trace, encoding, storage, retrieval, cross-race effect, weapon-focus effect, cognitive, witnesses, psychology