02.05.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

a-8-08.opn.html<br />

summarily to <strong>the</strong> trial court for a plenary<br />

hearing to consider <strong>and</strong> decide whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong><br />

assumptions <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r factors reflected in <strong>the</strong><br />

two-part Manson/Madison test, as well as <strong>the</strong><br />

five factors outlined in those cases to determine<br />

reliability, remain valid <strong>and</strong> appropriate in light<br />

of recent scientific <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r evidence.<br />

[Ibid.]<br />

We appointed <strong>the</strong> Honorable Geoffrey Gaulkin, P.J.A.D. (retired <strong>and</strong><br />

temporarily assigned on recall) to preside at <strong>the</strong> rem<strong>and</strong> hearing as a Special<br />

Master.<br />

Pursuant to <strong>the</strong> Order, <strong>the</strong> following parties participated in <strong>the</strong> rem<strong>and</strong><br />

hearing: <strong>the</strong> Attorney General, <strong>the</strong> Public Defender (representing defendant 4 ),<br />

<strong>and</strong> amici.<br />

The parties <strong>and</strong> amici collectively produced more than 360 exhibits, which<br />

included more than 200 published scientific studies on human memory <strong>and</strong><br />

eyewitness identification. During <strong>the</strong> ten-day rem<strong>and</strong> hearing, <strong>the</strong> Special<br />

Master heard testimony from seven expert witnesses. Three of <strong>the</strong>m –- Drs.<br />

Gary Wells, Steven Penrod, <strong>and</strong> Roy Malpass - testified about <strong>the</strong> state of<br />

scientific research in <strong>the</strong> field of eyewitness identification.<br />

Dr. Wells, who was called as a witness by <strong>the</strong> Innocence Project, holds a<br />

Ph.D. in Experimental Social Psychology <strong>and</strong> serves as a Professor of<br />

Psychology at Iowa <strong>State</strong> University. Since 1977, Dr. Wells has published more<br />

than 100 articles on eyewitness identification research. He assisted <strong>the</strong> Attorney<br />

General’s Office in connection with <strong>the</strong> formulation of <strong>the</strong> Attorney General<br />

Guidelines.<br />

Dr. Penrod, who was called as a witness by defendant, is a<br />

Distinguished Professor of Psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice<br />

in <strong>New</strong> York. He holds a degree in law <strong>and</strong> a Ph.D. in Pyschology. Dr. Penrod<br />

has also published extensively in <strong>the</strong> area of eyewitness identification <strong>and</strong> has<br />

served on <strong>the</strong> editorial board of numerous psychology journals.<br />

Dr. Malpass, who was called by <strong>the</strong> <strong>State</strong>, is also widely published. He<br />

http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/courts/supreme/a-8-08.opn.html[4/15/2013 6:04:23 PM]

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!