N.J. Changes Eyewitness Identification Laws
The state's high court was prompted by its acknowledgement of the unreliability of eyewitness identifications. The unanimous opinion, issued in August, creates objective procedures governing the reliability and weight given to eyewitness evidence.

December 18, 2011 /24-7PressRelease/ -- N.J. Changes Eyewitness Identification Laws

Across the nation, juries have long decided the fate of offenders on the veracity of eyewitness accounts. However, as recent newswires have been filled with pardons and releases based on false identifications, the reliability of eyewitness identifications has come under scrutiny. In an opinion that may drastically affect criminal eyewitness cases and appeals, the New Jersey Supreme Court has revised the legal test of eyewitness reliability -- making it easier for defendants to challenge eyewitness identification evidence in criminal cases

The state's high court was prompted by its acknowledgement of the unreliability of eyewitness identifications. The unanimous opinion, issued in August, creates objective procedures governing the reliability and weight given to eyewitness evidence. When a defendant challenges eyewitness testimony, the judge must hold a hearing. For example, a defendant could question the lighting at the scene of the alleged crime, how long ago the event took place or any undue police influence on the eyewitness. If the defendant is successful in his or her claim, the judge will suppress the evidence. If the judge still ultimately allows the evidence into court, the judge must inform the jurors of ways eyewitnesses can be influenced or mistaken.

Defense attorneys and advocacy groups, including the Innocence Project, support the change.

Research Indicated Time for Change

The N.J. Supreme Court challenged the reliability test set out by the United States Supreme Court more than three decades ago. The Court's conclusions were partially based on research led by Special Master Geoffrey Gaulkin, a retired judge.

Gaulkin, leading a team of researchers, reviewed more than 2,000 studies published on the topic since the Supreme Court's 1977 decision in Manson v. Brathwaite, which held that eyewitness testimony, depending on surrounding circumstances, was generally reliable. The research effort included weighing social science research as well as actual police lineups and forensic result exonerations. The 64-page comprehensive report concluded that one-third of eyewitnesses pick out the wrong person. The report ultimately questioned whether eyewitness identification processes should be considered trace evidence, which requires corroboration.

The impact of the New Jersey Supreme Court change may ultimately extend beyond its borders as states create standards similar to New Jersey's.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal defense attorney experienced with questioning the truth and reliability of eyewitness evidence.

Press Release Contact Information:

FL Web Advantage