Showups are an identification technique in which a single individual, the suspect, is presented in a one-on-one confrontation with the victim or other witness of a crime. The witness is asked to indicate whether the suspect is or is not the perpetrator. Showup identifications are very common and even favored by the police as an investigative procedure. They are considered inherently suggestive because the witness views only one person and the identification requires only the assent of the witness. This entry describes the criteria used to justify the use of showups, compares the outcomes of showups and lineups, and reviews some of the dangers presented by the use of showups.
Although showup identifications may be viewed with disfavor by the courts, they are not per se considered violations of due process if there was an overriding need in light of the totality of circumstances. Showups may be justified when an immediate identification would facilitate an ongoing police investigation, a quick exoneration of the innocent could be made, the identification is completed in close proximity in time and place to the scene of the crime, and the witness’s memory is strongest or in its freshest state.
犯罪现场表演是否过于暗示,并导致错误识别是法律和事实的混合问题。如果起诉可以通过清晰而令人信服的证据证明,尽管有一些暗示性,但表明的身份证明是足够可靠的,那么证人的身份是可以接受的。在此过程中的任何提示性都将涉及识别的重量,而不是其可接受性。相反,如果辩方能够证明表演程序是过分且不必要地暗示的,则基于不公平进行的露面的识别证据将被抑制。
Judges typically consider the following factors in determining whether pretrial suggestiveness unduly influenced the identification trial testimony of an eyewitness: (a) the opportunity of the witness to view the perpetrator at the time of the crime, (b) the witness’s degree of attention at the time of the crime, (c) the accuracy of the witness’s prior description of the perpetrator, (d) the level of certainty demonstrated at the time of the identification, and (e) the lapse of time between the crime and the identification procedure. Scientific research has shown, however, that only the opportunity to observe and the length of the retention interval are related to accuracy of identification. Most eyewitness researchers agree that the use of showups in contrast to many-person lineups increases the risk of misidentification, and the evidence in support of this conclusion is generally reliable.
有人认为,原则上的露面比阵容不公平,因为它们无法保护无辜的嫌疑人。也就是说,Showups无法在阵容填充剂中分发识别无辜嫌疑人的可能性,因此,它们增加了识别错误的风险。同样,假定露面程序是高压情况,在这种情况下,鼓励证人进行身份证明或情况,迫使证人进行身份证明。由于表演涉及嫌疑人的单一陈述,因此假设证人的决定是基于绝对判断,将嫌疑人与他或她对肇事者的记忆进行比较。观看表演可能类似于在连续阵容中查看第一人,在该阵容中,证人必须基于嫌疑人的个别演示和许多填充物做出绝对的判断。相比之下,同时提出的嫌疑人和填充物的阵容涉及证人对在阵容中最类似于肇事者的人做出相对判断。已显示顺序阵容可以增加对无辜嫌疑人的正确拒绝,而与同时呈现的嫌疑人和填充物的阵容相比,没有显着影响识别率(HIT)率的准确性(HIT)。因此,从理论上讲,如果露天增加正确的拒绝,则可能是有益的。但是,如果他们无法保护无辜的嫌疑人免受虚假身份,它们可能是危险的。此外,如果该过程暗示性,则选择的压力将增加,从而导致正确和不正确的选择增加。
表演和阵容演示的荟萃分析比较表明,与阵容相比,Showup的选择率较低。这表明证人在露面的情况下可能对他们的认同更加谨慎。与无法控制有罪嫌疑人的存在的实际情况不同,荟萃分析比较表明,在存在目标时,正确的识别率(HIT)率在两种情况下都非常相似(约46%)。当目标缺乏目标时,露面的正确排斥率明显更高。在目标条件下的错误识别大致相同(16%);但是,目标阵容中的错误分布在填充物中,而不是专注于露天中的无辜嫌疑人。当无辜的嫌疑人与肇事者相似时,当他们穿着类似的衣服时,虚假的标识尤其很高。
No significant differences in identification have been found between live and photographic showups. Witnesses are likely to be equally confident in showup identifications in their correct choices of guilty suspects and false selections of innocent suspects. Innocent suspects are at significantly less risk in being falsely identified in lineups than in showups, especially after 2- and 24-hour retention intervals. Comparisons of showups and lineups for voice identifications, either from tape-recordings presented in the field or over the telephone, indicate that lineups are significantly superior to showups in minimizing false identifications of a suspect who sounds very similar to the perpetrator.
关于酒精对露天鉴定的影响的研究表明,当对抗中存在有罪的嫌疑犯时,血液酒精水平与鉴定的准确性(hits)无关。但是,如果存在无辜的嫌疑人,则血液酒精水平越高,错误识别的数量就越大。
参考:
- Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2003). Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 523-540.
- Yarmey, A. D., Yarmey, M. J., & Yarmey, A. L. (1996). Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in showups and lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 459-177.
Return to the overview ofEyewitness MemoryinForensic Psychology.