Psychologists have long been worried about the reliability of ‘eyewitness’ testimony, and have drawn lessons from their empirical studies for the procedures of criminal investigation and legal proceedings. This chapter argues that there are significant flaws in much of this empirical work, and that the very strong conclusions about the ‘unreliability’ of eyewitness testimony are unwarranted. Several studies are examined in detail to show what seem to be typical interpretative and conceptual flaws.
Keywords: Buckhout; eyewitness; eyewitness testimony; Loftus; Marshall; positivism; scientism; Trankell; unreliability; witness
Chapter. 7586 words.
Full text: subscription required