Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Eyewitness Testimony: Prejudicial or Probative?. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 6 page exploration of the value of eyewitness testimony in a court of law. This paper notes the fact that such testimony can vary according to a number of diverse sociologic factors in its accuracy. The contention is presented that while this variation should not be used as a reason to blanketly exclude such testimony from a court of law, it should introduce a degree of caution into the process. Bibliography lists 6 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: AM2_PPeyeWit.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
a subject which is highly controversial and the admissibility of such evidence in the courtroom environment is thus a subject of considerable debate. Some authors like Elizabeth Loftus contend
that eyewitness testimony is the most influential aspect of the forensic process. At the same time, however, many doubt the validity of such evidence, pointing out that not only
is there no one generally accepted theory for this forensic evidence but studies regarding its value have revealed such testimony to be inconsistent (Ebbesen, 2003).
To be admissible to the courtroom any type of evidence must, by definition, be considered forensic given that the world "forensic" itself is derived from
the Latin word meaning "court of law". Forensic evidence, therefore, is used to prove the guilt or innocence of an individual. This is no consolation, however, for the
debate which continues to surround certain types of evidence. Eyewitness evidence, in particular, is a highly debated component of the forensic process. Indeed, even the procedures and methods
used to evaluate the topic have little relation to the legal procedure itself, a fact which makes the question of the validity of such testimony even more controversial (Ebbesen, 2003).
There is no contesting the fact that assessing the validity of eyewitness testimony in the courtroom environment is complicated by the
manner in which the human brain works in the recollection of memories is an extremely complex topic and to introduce such information into the courtroom as a means of either
supporting or refuting eyewitness testimony would only serve to confuse jurors even more (Ebbesen, 2003). The job of the forensic psychologist, however, is to psychological analyses which
...