Eliciting evidence from eye witnesses for court proceedings

Griffith Health, School of Applied PsychologyNo Full Tex

Lawyers' perceptions of police officers' performance in court

Police witnesses often provide crucial evidence in court. However, little research exists concerning positive and negative aspects of the presentation of police evidence in court and ways in which the presentation of police evidence can be improved. The present paper seeks to shed light on this issue through a survey of 15 lawyers who have experience of examining English police witnesses in court. The results showed that lawyers perceive that many police officers are giving effective evidence in court but that problems do exist that can be improved on, potentially through training. Issues of particular importance seem to be that officers thoroughly investigate the crime, take their own detailed notes, familiarise themselves with details of the case before attending court, give evidence confidently, concede points to the defence where appropriate demonstrating objectivity and honesty

Rape victims' experiences of giving evidence in English criminal courts: a survey

Nineteen rape victims who had given evidence in court in English courts were interviewed. Questions concerned their examination in court, their perceptions of the criminal justice system, particularly criminal court processes, and the perceived utility of 'special measures' to facilitate giving evidence. Participants believed that prosecution lawyers generally did not accuse them of lying, attack what they said, put their character in doubt, put words in their mouth or use trick or leading questions. Defence lawyers were perceived to be significantly more likely to use these techniques. Participants reported that they felt they understood what was going on and, importantly, felt that they were reasonably able to give accurate evidence. They generally showed high levels of satisfaction with the way they had been treated, and positive attitudes towards measures to make giving evidence less stressful.Griffith Health, School of Applied PsychologyNo Full Tex

The influence of courtroom questioning style on actual and perceived eyewitness confidence and accuracy

Purpose. Little research has been conducted on the effects of courtroom examination/questioning styles on witness confidence and accuracy. Two studies were therefore conducted, one investigating the effects of examination style on witness confidence and accuracy, the other investigating observers/jurors perceptions of witness confidence and accuracy.\ud \ud Method. In Study 1, after observing a video event, 60 witnesses were individually interviewed about the event according to one of three conditions: (1) simple questioning style, (2) lawyerese questioning style (containing leading and suppositional phrases), and (3) lawyerese with negative feedback style. In study 2, 60 observers/ jurors observed a good and a poor witness under examination by one of the three questioning styles. Measures of the perceived fairness of the examination were also taken in study 2.\ud \ud Results. In the main, significant results were found only for question items classed as difficult to remember. The lawyerese style appeared to have an adverse affect on confidence-accuracy relationships. Adding subtle negative feedback reduced the problem, but at the price of reduced overall accuracy. Observers (jurors) also seemed to be most affected by observing the negative feedback style; judging the witness overall to be less accurate. An unexpected result was that, regardless of questioning style, presenting the testimony of the least confident witness first appeared to spuriously boost confidence and thereby perceived accuracy, in that witness's testimony. No significant effects were found for perceived fairness.\ud \ud Conclusions. In general, these results lend some support to those who have asserted that the lawyerese style of questioning may be unwise