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

a-8-08.opn.html
But the target’s age may matter as well. As Dr. Penrod testified, “there’s an
own-age bias,” meaning that witnesses are “better at recognizing people of
[their] own age than . . . people of other ages.” That effect may appear in studies
that use college-age students as targets, for example. See id. at 321-23
(concluding that “young adults show better memory for young faces . . . than
older faces, whereas seniors show either no effect or the opposite effect”); see
also Melissa Boyce et al., Belief of Eyewitness Identification Evidence, in 2 The
Handbook of Eyewitness Psychology: Memory for People, supra, at 501, 512
(“Perhaps people should only use age as a factor in deciding whether to believe
an eyewitness if there is a large age difference between the witness and the
suspect.”).
Thus, the data about memory and older witnesses is more nuanced,
according to the scientific literature. In addition, there was little other
testimony at the hearing on the topic. Based on the record before us, we cannot
conclude that a standard jury instruction questioning the reliability of
identifications by all older eyewitnesses would be appropriate for use in all
cases.
6. Characteristics of Perpetrator
Disguises and changes in facial features can affect a witness’ ability to
remember and identify a perpetrator. The Special Master found that
“[d]isguises (e.g., hats, sunglasses, masks) are confounding to witnesses and
reduce the accuracy of identifications.” According to the State, those findings
are “so well-known that criminals employ them in their work.”
Disguises as simple as hats have been shown to reduce identification
accuracy. See Brian L. Cutler et al., Improving the Reliability of Eyewitness
Identification: Putting Context into Context, 72 J. Applied Psychol. 629, 635
(1987).
If facial features are altered between the time of the event and the
identification procedure -- if, for example, the culprit grows a beard -- the
accuracy of an identification may decrease. See K.E. Patterson & A.D. Baddeley,
When Face Recognition Fails, 3 J. Experimental Psychol.: Hum. Learning &
Memory 406, 410, 414 (1977).
http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/courts/supreme/a-8-08.opn.html[4/15/2013 6:04:23 PM]