Is eyewitness testimony about crimes completely useless?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

One of my roommates and I were watching Cops, and he just made the asinine statement that "All eyewitness testimony is completely useless."

I witnessed an armed robbery and got the license plate number (KYY 512) and was able to identify that one of the guys had a shotgun and the other had a handgun.  That's a hell of a lot more than "completely useless."

[Associate Justice PiT]

     This would be better on the Constitution & Law board, but whatever. Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate (Rashomon phenomenon), but it is by no means useless.

[dead0man]

One of your roommates likes to say dumb things out loud.

[MasterJedi]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

[Rin-chan]

No, it's useful in swaying the jury

Rin-chan

[MasterJedi]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

To add on hearsay is what generally is uesless and for the most part isn't even allowed into evidence.

[Rin-chan]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

To add on hearsay is what generally is uesless and for the most part isn't even allowed into evidence.

It's not allowed as evidence, but as I said in my comment, it is useful in swaying the jury to one side or the other.  If he is made to look like an idiot or like he's telling the truth, then he's very useful.  My dad has had cases where the witness was a complete jerk and he knew the jury would also see him that way and, because it would help his side of the case, he interviewed him.

Rin-chan

[MasterJedi]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

To add on hearsay is what generally is uesless and for the most part isn't even allowed into evidence.

It's not allowed as evidence, but as I said in my comment, it is useful in swaying the jury to one side or the other.  If he is made to look like an idiot or like he's telling the truth, then he's very useful.  My dad has had cases where the witness was a complete jerk and he knew the jury would also see him that way and, because it would help his side of the case, he interviewed him.

Rin-chan

You're confusing hearsay (basically I heard someone say X) with witness testimony. Or if you're not you're at least saying it badly.

[Rin-chan]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

To add on hearsay is what generally is uesless and for the most part isn't even allowed into evidence.

It's not allowed as evidence, but as I said in my comment, it is useful in swaying the jury to one side or the other.  If he is made to look like an idiot or like he's telling the truth, then he's very useful.  My dad has had cases where the witness was a complete jerk and he knew the jury would also see him that way and, because it would help his side of the case, he interviewed him.

Rin-chan

You're confusing hearsay (basically I heard someone say X) with witness testimony. Or if you're not you're at least saying it badly.

lol I'm not.  I'm just godawful at explaining things lol

Rin-chan

[specific_name]

I think the roommate in question is either fond of hyperbole or simply ignorant.

On the matter of hearsay, it isn't allowed of course, with exceptions "spontaneous declarations" etc... Sometimes people conflate the fallibility of memory with the overwhelming fallibility of hearsay. Not even close.

[Earth]

The lack of a fair and balanced poll is disturbing.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

To add on hearsay is what generally is uesless and for the most part isn't even allowed into evidence.

It's not allowed as evidence, but as I said in my comment, it is useful in swaying the jury to one side or the other.  If he is made to look like an idiot or like he's telling the truth, then he's very useful.  My dad has had cases where the witness was a complete jerk and he knew the jury would also see him that way and, because it would help his side of the case, he interviewed him.

Rin-chan

What kind of lawyer?

[Rin-chan]

No, though it is always biased by their perceptions.

To add on hearsay is what generally is uesless and for the most part isn't even allowed into evidence.

It's not allowed as evidence, but as I said in my comment, it is useful in swaying the jury to one side or the other.  If he is made to look like an idiot or like he's telling the truth, then he's very useful.  My dad has had cases where the witness was a complete jerk and he knew the jury would also see him that way and, because it would help his side of the case, he interviewed him.

Rin-chan

What kind of lawyer?

A little of everything, but the vast majority are civil cases.  He's a partner in his own small business.  Recently, he's been doing a lot more subrogation, but a lot of his cases are personal injury.

Rin-chan

[Јas]

As a to its reliability and verifiability, eyewitness evidence can be very, very dodgy.

It is though (rightly or wrongly) hugely valued by juries.