Advertisement

Show-Up Procedures, Relevant Policy Standards, and Training Standards

  • Jon ShaneEmail author
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Criminology book series (BRIEFSCRIMINOL)

Abstract

Eyewitness identification has high probative value for the prosecution’s case. One method for obtaining eyewitness identification is the show-up procedure. If the prosecution intends to rely on the show-up identification, then the show-up must not be impermissibly suggestive or prone to error, which can lead to misidentification. The United States Supreme Court resolved some questions about the suggestive nature of eyewitness identifications in United States v. Wade (1967),which implicates fairness and due process, specifically: (1) the manner in which confrontations for identification are typically conducted; (2) the dangers inherent in eyewitness identification and suggestiveness inherent in the context of the confrontation; and (3) because the likelihood that the accused will often be precluded from reconstructing what occurred, a full hearing on the identification issue at trial is warranted.

References

  1. 1.
    Steblay, N., Dysert, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). Eyewitness accuracy rates in police show-up and line-up presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 523–540.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yarmey, D. A., Yarmey, M. J., & Yarmey, L. A. (1996). Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in showups and lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 459–477.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Loughlin, M. G. (1990). What Is Bureaucratic Accountability and How Can We Measure It? Administration & Society, 22(3), 275–302.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2004). Criminal justice policy and planning (2nd ed., pp. 131–136). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Walker, S. (2010). The New World of Police Accountability. (pp. 46–49). Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adams, T. F. (2007). Police field operations (7th ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hale, C. (1981). Police patrol: Operations and management. NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Association of Chiefs of Police (1977) The Patrol Operation. 3rd edn. (IACP).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giacalone, J. (2011). The criminal investigative function: A guide for new investigators. NY: Looseleaf Law Publications.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lyman, M. D. (2008). Criminal investigation: The art and the science. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sonne, W. J. (2006). Criminal investigation for the professional investigator. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    National Institute of Justice (2000). Crime scene investigation. National Institute of Justice, NCJ# 178280.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swanson, C., Chemelin, N., & Territo, L. (1996). Criminal investigation (6th ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Geberth, V. J. (1996). Practical homicide investigation: Tactics, procedures and forensic techniques. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hess, K. M, Orthmann, C. H. (2010). Criminal investigation (9th ed.). Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Law, Police Science and Criminal Justice AdministrationJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations