Eyewitness Identification Research Findings as Related in the Brenton Butler Case 1

Eyewitness Identification Research Findings as Related in the Brenton Butler Case Carolina Garcia Panther ID: 2853281 Legal Psychology Dr. Lindsay Malloy December 2, 2011

Eyewitness Identification Research Findings as Related in the Brenton Butler Case 2 Mistaken eyewitness identifications are a serious issue that has led to many wrongful convictions. The Brenton Butler Case as depicted in the film Murder on a Sunday Morning is a captivating example of this serious issue (Lestrade & Poncet, 2008). Currently, there is evidence that proposes that erroneous eyewitness identification is the top cause of wrongful convictions (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). This evidence dates back to 1932 as identified by Edwin Borchard and his renowned book, Convicting the Innocent (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). In this book, Borchard reported that mistaken eyewitness identification errors were found in almost half of the sixty-five cases of wrongful convictions that he observed. More recent studies have found that such eyewitness misidentifications have contributed to the convictions in about three-fourths of the first two hundred fifty DNA exonerations and approximately one-half of death row exonerations (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). Evidence clearly shows that eyewitness misidentifications continue to be an issue that should not be taken lightly. For example, in the Brenton Butler case James Stephens mistakenly identified Butler as the assailant after his wife Mary Ann Stephens was shot to death in a spoiled robbery attempt (Lestrade & Poncet, 2008). Psychologists have studied many facets that can affect the reliability of eyewitness identifications, including but not limited to the varying capabilities of diverse types of witnesses, factors that impact memory, and the effects of post-identification events on eyewitness confidence and accuracy (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). The American Psychology-Law Division of the American Psychological Association put together a subcommittee in the late 1990s to review the scientific evidence of the top practices and procedures for eyewitness identifications and to propose further recommendations (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). Research evidence proposed that when witnesses assess a lineup or photo spread in which all of the suspects are shown all

Eyewitness Identification Research Findings as Related in the Brenton Butler Case 3 together they have an inclination to isolate the person who their approximation looks most like the perpetrator (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). This is known as making a relative judgment. Issues with reliability may arise because the true perpetrator may not be present in the lineup. There will always be someone who looks more like the perpetrator than the others. The tendency of the witness to make a relative identification judgment may be intensified if they feel as though they are expected to make a positive identification (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). In the case of Brenton Butler, Stephens was the only eyewitness to the crime. He gave a description of the perpetrator to a local Jacksonville sheriff who picked up Butler, an African American teenager on his way to apply to a job (Lestrade & Poncet, 2008). Stephens reportedly identified Butler as the perpetrator sitting in the back of a police vehicle. Butler was unarmed and did not carry the victims allegedly stolen possessions when he was arrested. In Stephens description of the perpetrator to the local sheriff he described the perpetrator to be wearing a fishermans hat. Butler was arrested not wearing a fishermans hat. It is important to note that studies have consistently reported that mock jurors are likely to judge eyewitness identifications as more reliable when witnesses express confidence in them while testifying. The justices acknowledged some factors to be considered in determining the reliability of eyewitness identification testimony, including: the witnesss opportunity to see the perpetrator at the time of the crime; the witnesss attention first viewing the perpetrator; the extent to which the witnesss description of the perpetrator is consistent with the defendants appearance; the time lapse between the first time the witness saw the perpetrator and the following identification; and the witnesss certainty of his identification (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). Butlers public defender Patrick McGuinness found a few discrepancies in Stephens description of the perpetrator and Butlers appearance at the time of the arrest (Lestrade & Poncet, 2008). Such

Eyewitness Identification Research Findings as Related in the Brenton Butler Case 4 discrepancies included a logo on the perpetrators shirt and the fishermans hat. There have been several proposed procedural reforms. Supporters of reform proposed that eyewitness identification procedures be led in a blind or double-blind manner; investigators administering the lineup or photo array should be unaware of the true suspects identity (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). Providing advice or instructions to witnesses prior to their attempt to make an identification may help protect against the obligation that witnesses may feel to make an identification (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). Finally, supporters of the reform also recommend that the lineup or photo array should be designed to ensure that the suspect does not excessively stand out (Acker, Bonventre, Norris, & Redlich, 2008). Another serious issue with eyewitness identification involves cross-racial identification. Murder on a Sunday Morning is a compelling example of a white eyewitness, Stephens, misidentifying Butler, a young African American, as the perpetrator (Lestrade & Poncet, 2008). In a study by psychologists Malpass and Kravitz, Recognition for Faces of Own and Other Race, compared recognition and memory of identification of persons among university students (Aaronson, 2008). Photos of black and white males were shown to the students. Participants recognized faces of their own race better than faces of a different race. Countless of other studies a similar consistent pattern (Aaronson, 2008). The studies show not only a greater difficulty in recognizing faces of another race, but people of one race also have more difficulty reconstructing faces of other races (Aaronson, 2008). Jury instructions specifically designed to protect against cross-racial identification errors should improve fairness and confidence in the criminal justice system and offer another way to help lessen the number of wrongful convictions involving crossracial misidentifications (Aaronson, 2008). Fortunately for Brenton Butler the jury found the defendant not guilty (Lestrade & Poncet, 2008).

Eyewitness Identification Research Findings as Related in the Brenton Butler Case 5 References Aaronson, D. E. (2008, Spring). Cross-racial identification of defendants in criminal cases: a proposed model jury instruction. Criminal Justice, 23(1), 4. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA205496134&v=2.1&u= niv&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w Acker, J. R., Bonventre, C. L., Norris, R. J., & Redlich, A. D. (2011, Spring). "Than that one innocent suffer": evaluating state safeguards against wrongful convictions. Albany Law Review, 74(3), 1301+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA269432317&v=2.1&u= flstuniv&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w estrade, .- . ., Poncet, ., Maha Productions., Path cin ma rance , rance cin ma (Firm),

Home Box Office (Firm), Centre national de la cin matographie

rance , New Video

Group. (2008). Murder on a Sunday morning. New York: Docurama.