Mangagom, Joy Claire B.

3-B

Reaction paper on “Why eyewitnesses get it all wrong”

People rely on their memory when trying to recall a past event, but
according to Scott Fraser human memories are not always reliable because the
brain picks up only bits and pieces of events and when the information relating to
such event is needed the brain fills in blank spaces with information gained from
other sources, thats why testimonies of witnesses in a judicial proceedings
involving cases such as murder,rape and others should be supported with object
evidence so that conviction of a person who did not commit the crime will be
avoided.

The example given by Scott Fraser about the murder of a man and six
eyewitnesses identified the same person to be the shooter which turned out to be
not the shooter is an example that eyewitnesses testimony are not relyiable and
also an warning that testimonies of eyewitnesses should not only be the
consideration or the basis to arrest or convict a person. Criminal investigators
when rellying on the testimony of an eyewitness should consider the factors
found in the crime scene , such as the lighting in the place of incidence when the
event happened, how far is the eyewitness from culprit and other circumstance.

Just like what Scott Fraser said that the US justice system should adopt the use
of more scientifict evidences more instead of using the eyewitness testimony as
the main evidence in order to avoid wrongful arrest, the Phillipine judiciary should
also consider this in order to avoid wronful arrest or conviction of innocent
persons.

It is because of testimonies of eyewitnesses that innocent persons are arrested

and convicted of a crime they did not commit thats why lawyers should not only
consider the testimony of an eye witness when filing a criminal or civil complaint
against a person they should dig deeper and find strong evidence to support
such testimony to prove that such person suspected to be the culprit is really the
person who commited the crime, or have violated a contract in cases of civil
actions. Material evidence specially in criminal actions is very important
beacause what is at stake is the liberty, a mere testimony of an eyewitness
should just be a secondary consideration to convict such person because if he is
convicted of a crime he did not commit it is not only his liberty which is affected
but also his life having been spent in prison instead doings things for his success.