Abstract
In his dissent in Watkins v. Sowders, Justice William J. Brennan of the United States Supreme Court found, “[T]here is almost nothing more convincing than a live human being who takes the stand, points a finger at the defendant, and says ‘That’s the one!’” Eyewitness identifications play a crucial role in the investigation and prosecution of crimes. However, the reliance on eyewitness testimony has also given rise to a significant issue within the criminal justice system: eyewitness misidentification. This phenomenon is now recognized as the leading cause of wrongful convictions in the United States. Over the years, extensive scientific and psychological research has uncovered the inherent malleability of human memory, demonstrating how memories can be influenced by various factors. Such findings have raised serious concerns about the reliability of eyewitness testimony and highlight the need for practices that mitigate the risks of misidentification. Despite this growing body of evidence, Pennsylvania has been slow to adopt reforms that align with the current understanding of memory science. This Comment critiques Pennsylvania’s current practices regarding eyewitness identification, emphasizing the Commonwealth’s failure to incorporate psychological research on memory reliability and its inadequate safeguards against misidentification. By comparing Pennsylvania’s approach to progressive reforms adopted in states like New Jersey—where courts have integrated psychological research into legal procedures and adopted modified jury instructions—this Comment highlights the urgent need for Pennsylvania to update its practices. These reforms are critical to reducing the risk of wrongful convictions and ensuring the fairness and integrity of its criminal justice system.
Recommended Citation
Chante Whyte,
Guilty Till Proven Innocent: Pennsylvania’s Battle with Eyewitness Misidentification and Wrongful Convictions,
130
Dick. L. Rev.
1069
(2025).
Available at:
https://insight.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlr/vol130/iss3/10