Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Chapple (D) was charged with murder. He was selected from a photograph lineup by several witnesses. D is accused of being 'Dee' a drug dealer and murderer. He denies this. There were two lineups; he was not identified in the first, but he was in the second. D testified at trial that the eyewitness identification was erroneous; he claimed a defense of alibi. P's position was that the identification was correct. D claimed that Scott and Buck were lying to save themselves by 'fingering' him because they were granted complete immunity for their part in the crime unless the facts showed that they had knowingly participated in the killings. D also claimed another witness was also given a deal with strong motives to testify against D. D also argues a case of mistaken identity. Scott and Buck picked the wrong picture out of the photographic lineup and that their subsequent photographic and in-court identifications were part of the 'feedback phenomenon' and are simply continuations or repetitions of the same mistake. D wanted to have Dr. Loftus testify. Dr. Elizabeth Loftus is a professor of psychology at the University of Washington. Dr. Loftus specializes in an area of experimental and clinical psychology dealing with perception, memory retention, and recall. Her qualifications are unquestioned, and it may fairly be said that she 'wrote the book' on the subject. The State (P) filed a motion to suppress his testimony, claiming that eyewitness identification had shortcomings which were common knowledge, so this expert testimony could not help the jury. The court granted P's motion to suppress. D was convicted. D appealed, claiming that the testimony should not have been suppressed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co