Writing Assignment 1: Identification Procedures
On March 1st 2021 Mr Jones, a 23-year-old man, is mugged at gunpoint on his way home from a
party. As he walks through a dimly lit alley, a man jumps out in front of him, points a gun at him, and
tells him to hand over his phone and wallet. Terrified, Mr Jones hands over his belongings. The man
then hits him with the gun and disappears.
Mr Jones files a report at the police station the same night. He testifies to Officer Klein that the man
looked to be in his early twenties, White, of average height and build, with short, dark hair. He is able
to provide details about the man’s clothing, and he says the man spoke with an Amsterdam accent.
One week later, Mr Jones is asked to return to the police station, Officer Klein shows him six
photographs (see below). Officer Klein asks Mr Jones if he recognises any of the men in the pictures.
Mr Jones takes a
few minutes to
study the
photographs, and
finally points to
Photograph 3.
Officer Klein
frowns and asks
him to take
another look at
the photographs.
Mr Jones
hesitates, then
notes that 3 and 6
look fairly similar,
and it could be
either one of
them. Two days
later, the police
arrest the man in Photograph 6. In court, the defence argues that the line-up was not conducted
fairly.
1. Highlight all instances where proper protocol was not followed in this identification
procedure.
a. There were no proper instructions given before the identification (he did not say that
the perpetrator may or may not be in these photographs).
b. Officer Klein did the line-up too, which indicates that this line-up is not double-blind.
c. Mr Jones took a few minutes, which indicates that he might engage in a relative
judgment strategy, which is shown to be vulnerable for inaccuracy and memory is
usually only accurate in 10-12 seconds. The officer did not take a note of this.
d. Officer Klein frowned and asked him to take another look at the photographs which
is a suggestive technique and might influence the identification process.
e. Mr Jones hesitated but the officer did not pick up on this signal of unconfidence.
f. Officer Klein did not ask for a confidence rating at all.
g. There is no sign of a recording of the identification procedure.
2. Pick two of the points you have highlighted and briefly describe why this is problematic,
and what effect it could have had on the identification (no more than 250 words/point).
, a. Officer Klein who frowned when Mr Jones pointed at the photograph. This implies
that Mr Jones is wrong and therefore influences the identification procedure. The
use of a suggestive facial expression and asking him to take another look influences
the identification procedure and makes the witness think he is wrong. This could
have caused confusion in Mr Jones, where he might have felt the need to choose
someone else even though the one he chose corresponded to the perpetrator in his
memory. The effect might have been that the wrong man, the man Officer Klein
thought was the perpetrator and not the man Mr Jones thought was the perpetrator,
was arrested because of this suggestive technique.
b. The officer failed to give proper instructions before the identification procedure
started. The line-up administrator did not tell Mr Jones that the perpetrator may or
may not be in the line-up. This could have the effect that Mr Jones felt the need to
choose and therefore chose someone from the line-up that did not totally
correspond to his memory. This is problematic because it could result in a false
identification. The eventual effect might have been that Mr Jones chose the wrong
man and the innocent man had to go to court.
On March 1st 2021 Mr Jones, a 23-year-old man, is mugged at gunpoint on his way home from a
party. As he walks through a dimly lit alley, a man jumps out in front of him, points a gun at him, and
tells him to hand over his phone and wallet. Terrified, Mr Jones hands over his belongings. The man
then hits him with the gun and disappears.
Mr Jones files a report at the police station the same night. He testifies to Officer Klein that the man
looked to be in his early twenties, White, of average height and build, with short, dark hair. He is able
to provide details about the man’s clothing, and he says the man spoke with an Amsterdam accent.
One week later, Mr Jones is asked to return to the police station, Officer Klein shows him six
photographs (see below). Officer Klein asks Mr Jones if he recognises any of the men in the pictures.
Mr Jones takes a
few minutes to
study the
photographs, and
finally points to
Photograph 3.
Officer Klein
frowns and asks
him to take
another look at
the photographs.
Mr Jones
hesitates, then
notes that 3 and 6
look fairly similar,
and it could be
either one of
them. Two days
later, the police
arrest the man in Photograph 6. In court, the defence argues that the line-up was not conducted
fairly.
1. Highlight all instances where proper protocol was not followed in this identification
procedure.
a. There were no proper instructions given before the identification (he did not say that
the perpetrator may or may not be in these photographs).
b. Officer Klein did the line-up too, which indicates that this line-up is not double-blind.
c. Mr Jones took a few minutes, which indicates that he might engage in a relative
judgment strategy, which is shown to be vulnerable for inaccuracy and memory is
usually only accurate in 10-12 seconds. The officer did not take a note of this.
d. Officer Klein frowned and asked him to take another look at the photographs which
is a suggestive technique and might influence the identification process.
e. Mr Jones hesitated but the officer did not pick up on this signal of unconfidence.
f. Officer Klein did not ask for a confidence rating at all.
g. There is no sign of a recording of the identification procedure.
2. Pick two of the points you have highlighted and briefly describe why this is problematic,
and what effect it could have had on the identification (no more than 250 words/point).
, a. Officer Klein who frowned when Mr Jones pointed at the photograph. This implies
that Mr Jones is wrong and therefore influences the identification procedure. The
use of a suggestive facial expression and asking him to take another look influences
the identification procedure and makes the witness think he is wrong. This could
have caused confusion in Mr Jones, where he might have felt the need to choose
someone else even though the one he chose corresponded to the perpetrator in his
memory. The effect might have been that the wrong man, the man Officer Klein
thought was the perpetrator and not the man Mr Jones thought was the perpetrator,
was arrested because of this suggestive technique.
b. The officer failed to give proper instructions before the identification procedure
started. The line-up administrator did not tell Mr Jones that the perpetrator may or
may not be in the line-up. This could have the effect that Mr Jones felt the need to
choose and therefore chose someone from the line-up that did not totally
correspond to his memory. This is problematic because it could result in a false
identification. The eventual effect might have been that Mr Jones chose the wrong
man and the innocent man had to go to court.
