NCJ Number
80768
Date Published
1980
Length
181 pages
Annotation
Findings are presented to show that existing trial procedures which purport to render truth and justice are not in accord with results of behavioral science studies that have examined the abilities of humans to observe, interpret, and recall events that have happened in their presence.
Abstract
Based on the author's own research as well as that of others, the study demonstrates that humans have meager abilities to observe, recall, or describe events as they actually happened. A body of psychological studies is presented to show that perception and recollection are so imperfect that evidence as accepted under current rules of law, bears little relation to authentic manifestations of truth. The trial is viewed as an effort by adversaries to dissect, contradict, and reshape testimony (which in itself may be but a shadow of the truth), toward partisan ends. As such, the trial is viewed as bearing little resemblance to a scientific quest for truth. The findings of relevant psychological research are examined in relation to suspect identification, variations in recall under different conditions, witness examination, jury decisionmaking, and the general dynamics of the trial. The text recommends that joint research be undertaken by lawyers and social scientists to determine the reliability of evidence that depends on observation and recollection, so that the rules of evidence and the conduct of trials may accord with scientific knowledge about the nature of human perception. Appended is a list of suggested projects for research and discussion by teams of lawyers and social scientists. A total of 333 footnotes, a subject index, and illustrations are included.