Examining the Role of Evidence-Based Suspicion in Racial Disparities in Wrongful Convictions

There are clear racial disparities in the rates of wrongful convictions, with Black exonerees disproportionately represented among the population of those exonerated, in DNA and non-DNA exonerations alike (National Registry of Exonerations, 2022; Innocence Project, 2022). This racial disparity also exists for those exonerees who were wrongfully convicted, at least in part, because an eyewitness mistakenly identified them. For decades, when eyewitness scholars explored racial bias, they focused on the cross-race effect or own-race bias among eyewitnesses, a bias positing that witness performance suffers when a witness is asked to make an identification of a cross-race face (Lee & Penrod, 2022; Meissner & Brigham, 2001). However, given that most crime occurs within-race (NACJD, 2016), the cross-race effect cannot explain racial disparities in exoneration data. This work examined mechanisms that might contribute to racial disparities in exoneration data, with a particular focus on racial disparities in the base rate of culprit-present lineups. In Study 1, I explored whether racial disparities in evidence-based suspicion (i.e., evidence of guilt prior to placement in a lineup) provide a better explanation of racial disparities in exonerations based on eyewitness misidentification than the own-race bias in eyewitness identifications. To do so, I conducted a meta-analysis on 54 effect sizes extracted from 16 studies (1,503 individual participants) that tested whether there was an own-race bias in eyewitness identifications using a design that varied the race of both the witnesses and the target faces (Black vs. White). I also constructed two curves that plotted the prior probability of suspect guilt against the posterior probability of guilt: one if an identification were to be obtained for a Black suspect and one if an identification were to be obtained for a White suspect. Participants, irrespective of their race, were better able to discriminate among previously seen White than Black targets. However, the differential accuracy rates for identifications of White versus Black suspects were too small to explain racial disparities in exoneration data on their own, suggesting that racial disparities in evidence that police have against suspects before placing them in an identification procedure would likely explain more of the variance in racial disparities in mistaken identifications that lead to wrongful convictions. In Study 2, I examined whether defense attorneys are less sensitive to prior evidence of guilt when the defendant is Black as opposed to White. To do so, I gave 316 defense attorneys NYPD-style case files that varied the strength of the pre-identification evidence (strong vs. weak), the race of the defendant (Black vs. White), and the race of the victim (Black vs. White). Attorneys made judgments that were sensitive to the base rate of guilt, but self-report measures demonstrated that they did not understand the extent to which the base rate of guilt influences the reliability of eyewitness evidence. Participants also rated the strength of the pre-identification evidence as stronger for Black than for White defendants. This research supports the conclusion that racially biased investigatory judgments may explain racial disparities in exoneration data based on eyewitness misidentifications. Additionally, although attorneys are intuitively sensitive to the strength of pre-identification evidence, they lack conscious awareness to this issue which may have implications for their ability to make race-neutral evaluations of pre-identification evidence

Science-Based Recommendations for the Collection of Eyewitness Identification Evidence

For almost 70% of the wrongfully convicted defendants who have been exonerated by new DNA evidence, one or more mistaken eyewitness identifications played a role in their wrongful convictions.1 In recognition of the significant role that mistaken identifications play in miscarriages of justice, social scientists have spent the last 40 years studying which police practices can be improved to increase the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence, including instructions to witnesses,2 selecting fillers (i.e., known innocent persons) for lineups or photo arrays who do not cause the suspect to stand out,3 and eliminating possible feedback from administrators who know which lineup member is the suspect.4 Based on this body of research, the American Psychology-Law Society (AP-LS)5 commissioned a panel of eyewitness scholars to review the extant literature and make evidence-based recommendations about the best police practice for enhancing the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence.

Raising the Standard of Evidence for Initiating an Identification Procedure

How do police select suspects for witnesses to identify? There is currently no standard for the quantity of evidence required before investigators can order an identification procedure. Because eyewitness misidentification continues to be the leading cause of wrongful convictions, law and policy should guide police discretion at this investigatory stage by requiring detectives to show an evidentiary basis for placing suspects in lineups, showups, or photo arrays. The American Law Institute has proposed an addition to the Model Penal Code requiring police to have a strong basis in factual evidence before conducting identification procedures. The American Psychology-Law Society called for an evidence-based suspicion standard. Current law provides Fifth Amendment due process challenges to the suggestiveness of such procedures post hoc but does not address the reasons police may apply them to subjects ab initio, which is a Fourth Amendment concern. Reviewing Terry v. Ohio (1968), Justice Brennan’s dicta in Davis v. Mississippi (1969), and Maryland v. Buie (1990), this Article outlines Fourth Amendment-based arguments for developing a standard of evidence for initiating identification procedures, concluding that the reasonable suspicion standard of Terry is insufficient, and an articulable facts standard should be implemented

Waiving goodbye to youth: Jurors’ perceptions of juveniles transferred to adult courts

Juveniles are often subjected to the same interrogation tactics as adults despite being developmentally more vulnerable. We examined how jurors make decisions in cases where juveniles were interrogated and tried as adults. Participants listened to a mock trial that varied defendant’s age (juvenile, adult), interrogation pressure (low, high), and confession (denial, confession)

Deceptive Interrogation Tactics have Downstream Consequences on Innocent and Guilty Defendants’ Plea Decisions

We examined whether minimization and maximization techniques during police interrogations may, through the use of pragmatic implications and the presentation of false evidence, bias innocent and guilty defendants’ perceptions of their likelihood of being convicted at trial, the harshness of the potential consequences they would receive upon conviction, and their plea decisions. Recommended citation: Fessinger, M. B., Katzman, J. A., Close, M., & Kovera, M. B. (revision in preparation). Deceptive interrogation tactics have downstream consequences on innocent and guilty defendants’ plea decisions

Transcriptional repression by FEZF2 restricts alternative identities of cortical projection neurons.

Projection neuron subtype identities in the cerebral cortex are established by expressing pan-cortical and subtype-specific effector genes that execute terminal differentiation programs bestowing neurons with a glutamatergic neuron phenotype and subtype-specific morphology, physiology, and axonal projections. Whether pan-cortical glutamatergic and subtype-specific characteristics are regulated by the same genes or controlled by distinct programs remains largely unknown. Here, we show that FEZF2 functions as a transcriptional repressor, and it regulates subtype-specific identities of both corticothalamic and subcerebral neurons by selectively repressing expression of genes inappropriate for each neuronal subtype. We report that TLE4, specifically expressed in layer 6 corticothalamic neurons, is recruited by FEZF2 to inhibit layer 5 subcerebral neuronal genes. Together with previous studies, our results indicate that a cortical glutamatergic identity is specified by multiple parallel pathways active in progenitor cells, whereas projection neuron subtype-specific identity is achieved through selectively repressing genes associated with alternate identities in differentiating neurons

Transcriptional repression by FEZF2 restricts alternative identities of cortical projection neurons.

Projection neuron subtype identities in the cerebral cortex are established by expressing pan-cortical and subtype-specific effector genes that execute terminal differentiation programs bestowing neurons with a glutamatergic neuron phenotype and subtype-specific morphology, physiology, and axonal projections. Whether pan-cortical glutamatergic and subtype-specific characteristics are regulated by the same genes or controlled by distinct programs remains largely unknown. Here, we show that FEZF2 functions as a transcriptional repressor, and it regulates subtype-specific identities of both corticothalamic and subcerebral neurons by selectively repressing expression of genes inappropriate for each neuronal subtype. We report that TLE4, specifically expressed in layer 6 corticothalamic neurons, is recruited by FEZF2 to inhibit layer 5 subcerebral neuronal genes. Together with previous studies, our results indicate that a cortical glutamatergic identity is specified by multiple parallel pathways active in progenitor cells, whereas projection neuron subtype-specific identity is achieved through selectively repressing genes associated with alternate identities in differentiating neurons