You are a social psychologist contacted by a defense attorney who ...

[tichca]

You are a social psychologist contacted by a defense attorney who is convinced that her client is innocent of assault. The prosecution's case rests heavily on eyewitness testimony.
 
  You have agreed to serve as an expert witness whose task is to educate the jury about the shortcomings of eyewitness testimony. What would you tell the court?
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

The presence of a dissenting juror is desirable because they encourage other jurors to
 
  a. consider the evidence more carefully.
  b. discuss their original biases.
  c. convict on the more serious offense.
  d. reach a speedy and accurate verdict.

[Tonyam972]

Answer to Question 1

Answer: First, you would be well advised to summarize research evidence that eyewitness testimony is often inaccurate and suggest that jurors should carefully consider both the conditions under which the eyewitnesses saw the alleged offender (Did it all happen fast? How light was it? Was the assault unexpected?) and to consider the conditions under which the defendant was picked from a lineup (Were the foils similar to witnesses' initial descriptions? Were witnesses told that the perpetrator might not be in the lineup? Was the lineup sequential or simultaneous? Did the defendant just pop out at witnesses, or did they deliberate before identifying him?). Second, you would point out that confident eyewitnesses are not necessarily more accurate than are unconfident witnesses.

Answer to Question 2

Answer: A