LAW

Issue of Reliability Arised in Eyewirness Evidence, with Reference to Ronald Cotton Case



Issue of Reliability Arised in Eyewirness Evidence, with Reference to Ronald Cotton Case

Introduction

Eyewitness misidentification is one of the main reasons for wrongful conviction across the globe. It contributes approximately 75% of the convictions reversed through the process of DNA testing (www.innocenceproject.org/). This eyewitness testimony could be influential substantiation prior to judge or jury. Thirty years of social science's strong research has proven that the eyewitness identification is often unreliable (www.innocenceproject.org/).

Furthermore, the research has also identified that considering human mind as a tape recorder is a wrong perception, as it is not possible to record the exact happening in our mind and it is also difficult to recall the same event. Rather, witness memory is just like any other proof from a scene of crime. It might not be carefully maintained and remembered, rather it could be contaminated (www.innocenceproject.org/). Thus, the issue of relying on eyewitness memory is really critical in law; this paper critically evaluates the issue of eyewitness reliability with reference to Ronald Cotton case explaining how problems about reliability can arise in eyewitness evidence.

Discussion

Overview of the Ronald Cotton Case

In this case, 22 years old African American Ronald Cotton was arrested for raping two woman, named Jennifer Thompson and Watson. In 1984, Cotton broke into the apartment of Thompson and tried to rape her, but the girl escaped from that place and called a police. During that time, Cotton left Thomson's apartment and entered into Watson place demanding same sexual intercourse as he did to Thompson. Thompson did remember Cotton's face, however, Watson was unable to identify the face of assailant. After inquiry, Cotton was arrested for rapes and burglary cases.

Ronal Cotton was sentenced to prison for life. Cotton's family supported his alibi, but the jury relied on the eyewitness, Thompson, as the second victim was unable to identify the culperate from the photo that police presented in front of her. Thompson further said that the man was African American and was wearing athletic shoes that had foam rubber, which was found during investigation in her apartment. Hence, Cotton was arrested on the basis of picture identification by Thomson and the similar material found in the aprtment's of Thomson and Cotton (www.innocenceproject.org/).

In the end of 1987, Cotton was reheard for both the cases, where the second victim, Watson, was also determined that the attacker was Cotton. Before Cotton trail, there was a man in prison named Booby Poole, this man was also in twenties state and he was the real assailant for which Cotton was punished. However, this was not accepted by the Court but Richard Rosen, a professor at university, stress on the DNA testing. Previously, Bobby's blood matched with the blood found in the Watson's place but Bobby was a witness & therefore he refused both rapes. After DNA testing,it was found out that the sample did not match with Cotton's DNA therefore it was apparent then that Cotton was ...