State v. Henderson and the New Model Jury Charges - New Jersey ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Blind Lineup Procedures prevent: Verbal influences on identification decision • e.g., suspect is in position #3, Witness: “um..number two..” Detective: “Now, be sure you look at everyone” • or, if suspect is in position 3, Witness: says “um..number three..” Detective: “Tell me about number three” • or, if the eyewitness says nothing.. Detective: “I noticed you paused on number three” Nonverbal influences on identification – Pauses, leaning, displays of interest/disinterest 9
Percentages of choices in the Target Absent (TA) and the Target Present (TP) condition, as a function of administrator steering Administrator Steering Blind Lineup and decision N (%) N (%) Target Absent Lineup False Suspect ID 19 31.7 6 10.0** Correct Rejection 28 46.7 32 53.3 Foil Identification 13 21.7 22 36.7 Total (N=120) 60 100.0 60 100.0 Target Present Lineup Hit 34 56.7 11 18.3** Rejection Lineup 16 26.7 25 41.7 Foil Identification 10 16.7 24 40.0** Total (N=120) 60 100.0 60 100.0
Page 1 and 2: Criminal Litigation Track State v H
Page 3 and 4: What was Henderson All About? • H
Page 6 and 7: “Human memory is not foolproof. R
Page 8 and 9: Non-exhaustive list of system varia
Page 12 and 13: Witness Instructions • Who scored
Page 14: Lineup Construction. Did the array
Page 19 and 20: The Perpetrator was Described as a
Page 21 and 22: Feedback to Witnesses • Wells and
Page 23 and 24: Other studies by Wells and his stud
Page 25 and 26: A Problem: Confidence malleability.
Page 27 and 28: Showups. •Did the police perform
Page 29 and 30: Private Actors. •Private Actors =
Page 31 and 32: Non-exhaustive list of estimator va
Page 33 and 34: Stress • Identification accuracy
Page 35 and 36: Weapon Focus ID accuracy is reduced
Page 37 and 38: Duration • Witnesses frequently o
Page 39 and 40: Distance • IMPORTANT STUDY: Loftu
Page 41 and 42: Distance 100 Feet
Page 47 and 48: Characteristics of Perpetrator. Was
Page 49 and 50: Disguise and Identification accurac
Page 51: Common belief: Memory Decay
Page 54 and 55: First, Let’s Identify What Race R
Page 56 and 57: OWN-RACE BIAS Meissner & Brigham (2
Page 58 and 59: Must Add: The Court specifically ad
Page 60 and 61:
State v. Henderson, 208 N.J. 208 (2
Page 62 and 63:
4. Distance and Lighting. How close
Page 64 and 65:
Trial “Expert testimony may also
Page 66 and 67:
“Disguises and changes in facial
Page 68 and 69:
a-8-08.opn.html eyewitness identifi
Page 70 and 71:
a-8-08.opn.html an identification i
Page 72 and 73:
a-8-08.opn.html Barry C. Scheck, a
Page 74 and 75:
a-8-08.opn.html XII. Retroactivity
Page 76 and 77:
a-8-08.opn.html broader approach, w
Page 78 and 79:
a-8-08.opn.html Harper slumped over
Page 80 and 81:
a-8-08.opn.html your selection. It
Page 82 and 83:
a-8-08.opn.html said that he “rea
Page 84 and 85:
a-8-08.opn.html 7.2. Defendant appe
Page 86 and 87:
a-8-08.opn.html holds a Ph.D., and
Page 88 and 89:
a-8-08.opn.html court failed to ins
Page 90 and 91:
a-8-08.opn.html experiments, Dr. Pe
Page 92 and 93:
a-8-08.opn.html Applied Cognitive P
Page 94 and 95:
a-8-08.opn.html o.b., 135 N.J. 3 (1
Page 96 and 97:
a-8-08.opn.html convincing than a w
Page 98 and 99:
a-8-08.opn.html reviewed journals.
Page 100 and 101:
a-8-08.opn.html are tied to an incr
Page 102 and 103:
a-8-08.opn.html We review each of t
Page 104 and 105:
a-8-08.opn.html The consequences ar
Page 106 and 107:
a-8-08.opn.html Second, lineups sho
Page 108 and 109:
a-8-08.opn.html Delay, 9 J. Experim
Page 110 and 111:
a-8-08.opn.html included in a later
Page 112 and 113:
a-8-08.opn.html depicted in the com
Page 114 and 115:
a-8-08.opn.html research reveals th
Page 116 and 117:
a-8-08.opn.html Although the study
Page 118 and 119:
a-8-08.opn.html e.g., R.C.L. Lindsa
Page 120 and 121:
a-8-08.opn.html 7. Memory Decay Mem
Page 122 and 123:
a-8-08.opn.html either through conv
Page 124 and 125:
a-8-08.opn.html Laboratory studies
Page 126 and 127:
a-8-08.opn.html possible to replica
Page 128 and 129:
a-8-08.opn.html of the eyewitness c
Page 130 and 131:
a-8-08.opn.html The Attorney Genera
Page 132 and 133:
a-8-08.opn.html Along with Manson/M
Page 134 and 135:
a-8-08.opn.html of an identificatio
Page 136 and 137:
a-8-08.opn.html produce “an impre
Page 138 and 139:
a-8-08.opn.html evaluating eyewitne
Page 140 and 141:
a-8-08.opn.html 5. Recording Confid
Page 142 and 143:
a-8-08.opn.html “memory decay”
Page 144 and 145:
a-8-08.opn.html focus on system var
Page 146 and 147:
a-8-08.opn.html (2006). A simple re
Page 148 and 149:
a-8-08.opn.html have found scientif
Page 150 and 151:
a-8-08.opn.html The remaining two f
Page 152 and 153:
a-8-08.opn.html and appropriate jur
Page 154 and 155:
a-8-08.opn.html possible shortcomin
Page 156 and 157:
a-8-08.opn.html DECIDED August 24,
Page 158 and 159:
a-8-08.opn.html of Illinois: The Il
Page 163 and 164:
Overview State v Henderson, decide
Page 165 and 166:
Issues and Authorities Involved U.
Page 167 and 168:
CHANGES WROUGHT New vocabulary: Sy
Page 169 and 170:
Henderson Holding Henderson has ma
Page 171 and 172:
RECORDING & DOCUMENTATION REQUIREME
Page 173 and 174:
RECORDING & DOCUMENTATION Document
Page 175 and 176:
AG GUIDELINES STEP 1: Determine wh
Page 177 and 178:
AG GUIDELINES STEP 3: Showing the
Page 179 and 180:
Sequential vs. Simultaneous • SEQ
Page 181 and 182:
TRIAL PROCEDURES & EVIDENTIARY ISSU
Page 183 and 184:
Text of New Court Rules
Page 185 and 186:
Estimator Variables 1. Stress. Did
Page 187 and 188:
Estimator Variables 7. Memory deca
Page 189 and 190:
Important points for litigation 1)
Page 191 and 192:
Identification: In-Court and Out-of
Page 193 and 194:
ESTIMATOR VARIABLES 1. Stress. Did
Page 195 and 196:
Hon. Lisa Rose, J.S.C. Judge Rose t
show all

State v. Henderson and the New Model Jury Charges - New Jersey ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?