Rock Center
Slightly more than half of all people who took Rock Center's mock police photo lineup test were able to identify the correct suspect.
In early April, correspondent Josh Mankiewicz reported on new challenges to the way photo lineups are administered by law enforcement agencies after a series of wrongful convictions were identified. Viewers were then asked to take part in an unscientific test by watching a video of a mock crime taking place and then trying to identify the correct person seen in the video out of six fictional suspects.
Out of 2,499 responses since the Rock Center report was broadcast, 1,347 were correct -- 54 percent -- meaning 46 percent of test takers selected the wrong suspect from the mock police photo lineup.
Counter to the “live lineups” we see on television, in actual crimes more often than not the detective or officer working the case presents the witness with a five or six-person photo lineup. One of the people in the lineup is the actual suspect and the rest are what are referred to as “fillers,” all chosen to roughly resemble the suspect. However, decades of research suggest that this traditional method is flawed. Nationwide, 75 percent of prisoners exonerated by DNA evidence were convicted on the basis of faulty eyewitness identification. As a result some states and law enforcement agencies across the country are beginning to change their procedures.
Click here to watch Josh Mankiewicz's original Rock Center report and take the mock lineup test below.
Leave a Comment:
I picked the right suspect. I wonder if it was because I am a former police officer with training and able to testify 30 to 60 days after crimes.
I picked the right guy......big deal Hang em I say!!!!!
#1 -
I have had no "policing" experience and I picked correctly to, but it was a guess.
I have had some line up experience, both photo and stand-up/one way glass.
I was never 100% sure.
I picked the correct suspect, however, I knew I would be asked to do so. Had this been an actual crime? A lot of people look similar, I can see where it would be very easy to make a mistake.
DNA in my opinion is questionable also. A few years ago, a guy in Wisconsin was released from prison because DNA said he did not do the rape he was convicted of. However, a short time after his release, he raped and murdered a woman. No question of his innocence, the body was found on his land and he had coerced his nephew into getting involved. I wonder if DNA analysis, like finger-print analysis is only as reliable as the person doing the analysis.
Errrm... the eye witness test was easy. BUT... I'm watching a video and picking a suspect 3 seconds later. By the time police approach a witness with a lineup, it is going to be AT LEAST hours, and sometimes DAYS before that happens. I'm not very confident I could pick the right guy in this video if I watched it and waited a couple of days to view the lineup, so I'm sure it would be difficult in real life.
I was only able to pick the correct person on my second try, and then only after I watched him very carefully and tried to memorize his features. I can't tell people apart very well - a mild case of "face blindness", I think. I would be very reluctant to convict someone on eye witness testimony, unless the person testifying knew the individual before the crime.