•  
  •  
 

Authors

Kelly McKay

Document Type

Article

Media Type

Text

Abstract

Eyewitness testimony experts are called to testify during criminal trials to explain the unreliability of eyewitness identifications. These experts describe to the jury how human memory works and try to create some doubt in the eyewitness's testimony. But are these experts really necessary when other methods can be used to create doubt in eyewitness testimony? This Comment discusses why eyewitness testimony experts should not be allowed to testify and the admissibility of eyewitness testimony experts throughout the country, primarily focusing on Illinois. This Comment also mentions New Jersey v. Henderson, which discusses the adoption of expansive jury instructions for eyewitness testimony. Ultimately, this Comment encourages Illinois to implement jury instructions similar to New Jersey instead of allowing eyewitness testimony experts to testify.

First Page

175

Last Page

201

Publication Date

9-1-2016

Department

College of Law

ISSN

0734-1490

Language

eng

Publisher

Northern Illinois University Law Review

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.