STORY: "Jury instructions on eyewitness testimony updated: Guidance said to help jurors assess reliability," by Travis Anderson and Martin Finucane, published by the Boston Globe on January 12, 2015;
GIST: "The state Supreme Judicial Court on Monday issued updated instructions that judges should give to jurors to help them assess the reliability of eyewitness testimony. “The accuracy of an eyewitness identification is often the critical issue in a criminal case, the difference between a conviction and an acquittal,” wrote Chief Justice Ralph D. Gants in an opinion explaining the new instructions......... In Monday’s ruling, the SJC upheld Gomes’s conviction on charges of mayhem and breaking and entering into a vehicle at night with the intent to commit a felony, finding the trial judge did not err in declining Gomes’s request, in part because his lawyer presented no expert witnesses to support the principles outlined in the proposed instructions. However, Gants wrote, after reviewing the case along with an SJC study group report on eyewitness evidence that was completed in 2013, the high court has decided to issue a new template for judges to use when instructing jurors on eyewitness identification.........The SJC Boston Globe;instructions include a warning that a witness’s expressed certainty may not indicate accuracy, especially when the witness did not express the same level of certainty when first making the identification. The template also includes commentary on the complexity of recalling past events, the effect of stress on eyewitness identification, the length of time that elapsed between a crime and a person being identified, and issues associated with having a witness view a suspect multiple times during identification procedures. In addition, the instructions allow jurors to consider whether witnesses were exposed to descriptions given by others, including police officers, which “may inflate the witness’s confidence in the identification.......Elizabeth A. Lunt, president of the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said the ruling will help make jurors aware of scientific principles regarding eyewitness identifications. “This has been an issue for years and years,” Lunt said. “Jurors tend to believe eyewitness identification — ‘I’ll never forget that face’ ” — but researchers have highlighted the “difficulties people have making identifications, particularly under pressure.”"
GIST: "The state Supreme Judicial Court on Monday issued updated instructions that judges should give to jurors to help them assess the reliability of eyewitness testimony. “The accuracy of an eyewitness identification is often the critical issue in a criminal case, the difference between a conviction and an acquittal,” wrote Chief Justice Ralph D. Gants in an opinion explaining the new instructions......... In Monday’s ruling, the SJC upheld Gomes’s conviction on charges of mayhem and breaking and entering into a vehicle at night with the intent to commit a felony, finding the trial judge did not err in declining Gomes’s request, in part because his lawyer presented no expert witnesses to support the principles outlined in the proposed instructions. However, Gants wrote, after reviewing the case along with an SJC study group report on eyewitness evidence that was completed in 2013, the high court has decided to issue a new template for judges to use when instructing jurors on eyewitness identification.........The SJC Boston Globe;instructions include a warning that a witness’s expressed certainty may not indicate accuracy, especially when the witness did not express the same level of certainty when first making the identification. The template also includes commentary on the complexity of recalling past events, the effect of stress on eyewitness identification, the length of time that elapsed between a crime and a person being identified, and issues associated with having a witness view a suspect multiple times during identification procedures. In addition, the instructions allow jurors to consider whether witnesses were exposed to descriptions given by others, including police officers, which “may inflate the witness’s confidence in the identification.......Elizabeth A. Lunt, president of the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said the ruling will help make jurors aware of scientific principles regarding eyewitness identifications. “This has been an issue for years and years,” Lunt said. “Jurors tend to believe eyewitness identification — ‘I’ll never forget that face’ ” — but researchers have highlighted the “difficulties people have making identifications, particularly under pressure.”"
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/01/12/high-court-changes-jury-instructions-eyewitness-testimony-reflect-latest-science/Qo8FfCTeMeGrkYpKRYPRbL/story.html?rss_id=Top-GNP
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
I look forward to hearing from readers at:
hlevy15@gmail.com.
Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;
