http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mlineups.htm
Now that’s a staff report. Great work, Bricker.
That is a marvelous staff report. Kudos Bricker.
On an unrelated note, would you be willing to take my upcoming Criminal Procedure final for me? Puh-lease??? It’s going to be multiple choice and short answer.
Very nice, Bricker. As an addendum, I asked a local prosecutor recently where the additional photos for photographic lineups come from. They have a computer program that analyzes the facial characteristics and biographic data of a statewide database of mugshots and selects people with a general resemblance to the suspect.
Great report Bricker.
I have an oddball trivial question. Has anyone ever been brought into a line-up as a filler that eventually turned out to be the actual criminal?
Jim
Very well done Bricker.
I only have one question re:
Why no mention of the sloping brow and cranial bumpage of the career criminal?
Yes, very interesting read.
One nitpick on the movie connection:
The lineup in The Usual Suspects is the five titular felons, not one suspect plus four cops. The characters do express suspicion about it afterward, though:
Is there a DVD with more bonus materials that I need to pick up?
Good article.
Nicely done, but someone’s math seems to be a bit off.
If the method reduced wrong selections wouldn’t the correct selections have increased?
I must quote Chief Wiggum: “OK, boys. Send in the clowns.”
Nice report.
Apparently not: Does the Sequential Lineup Reduce Accurate Identifications in Addition to Reducing Mistaken Identifications?
Yes, but… by Wells.
Here is Gary Wells’s website, which has a bunch of stuff about eyewitness identification: http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/FACULTY/gwells/homepage.htm
Only if there were just two situations, wrong answers and right answers. But there’s also the case where the witness doesn’t (or can’t) pick anyone from the lineup – that’s neither wrong nor right
And congrats, bricker, on another superb report!
That was an excellent report, Bricker, let my voice be added!
I was especially interested in the descriptions of how photo lineups would be handled, because of a persona experience.
I was once attacked, in my own home, by a stranger that broke in. Went through the usual descriptions to the police and so on. Week and a half later the police call one evening and say they have some pictures they’d like me to view, like, right away. So I say sure, and they bring them to my house. Six photos as I recall, fitting the age, race, and so ons. I looked at them all at once, and as I recall the officers didn’t try to lead me at all, not really speaking. So I pointed out the one as looking just like the guy who attacked me, and when I did I noticed the officers seemed to “deflate” a little. They thanked me, took the pictures and left, and I never heard from them again. But in the paper the next morning there was news about a murder in town, with a photograph of the suspect, and I recognized him too, as one of the other guys in the set of pictures.
So I think they were trying not to help me, but were hoping they’d have something even more on the murder suspect.
Though the reference to The Usual Suspects is in error (in an otherwise informative and entertaining report), Bricker may have been thinking of a 1996 episode of Law & Order (“Remand”) in which a rape/attempted murder case from thirty years earlier must be retried. The accused’s attorney disparages the police lineup procedure of the sixties, in which the Hispanic suspect was in a line with “five Irish cops.”
Abe Vigoda played one of the long-retired original investigators, I mention for the heck of it.
Excellent report, thank you Bricker. Just the right mix of crisp fact, visible support, and wise-ass commentary. Keep it up.
I’m going to have to figure out what movie I’m thinking of – for years I have told the “Usual Suspects” lineup story, and although I remain convinced it was something I actually saw in a movie, I am beginning to think it might possibly not have been in The Usual Suspects.
WAG here. The idea of having uniformed cops in a lineup (and I think I remember seeing it too) is so crazy it is almost slapstick–a sight gag. Like something from one of the *Police Academy * or *Naked Gun * movies. It’s funny because even someone who believes some of the more common legal urban legends will see that it’s crazy. I’d start looking there.
OTOH, I’m pretty sure I’ve read some cases about lineups that come close to this (suspect is the only member of racial group described by witness, suspect is much taller or shorter than fillers, suspect is dressed as described–others are not).
The funny bit in *Usual Suspects * was the way the actors played the “gimme the keys” (or whatever it was) line during the lineup.
regarding http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mlineups.htm
The movie with the police lineup containing one suspect and 4 uniformed police officers was “running scared” staring Billy Crystal and Gregory Hines. The Suspect was “Snake” played by Joe Pantoliano. The witness was Billy Crystal. “Thats the one. I’ll never forget his face, I saw it through the screen. You [bleep]!”
I remember a similar scene, and in my memory Billy Crystal is part of it.
Looking through his filmography on IMDB, I think it’s probably Running Scared.