The case proves that the witness's memory error is the chief culprit of unjust, false and misjudged cases.
Ronald Cotton, an American youth, was inexplicably accused of being a rapist and spent 1 1 year in prison. He finally cleared his name through DNA testing, proving that the witness did "look elsewhere" when identifying the criminal.
Today, witness testimony is still an important evidence material in judicial trials. However, research shows that people's memory is flawed and wrong, and the inaccuracy of witness testimony has become one of the important reasons leading to unjust, false and wrong cases.
An unexplained disaster
1On July 28th, 984, jenniferbeth thompson, then 22, was a college student in Burlington, North Carolina, USA. She went to bed early that day. A man smashed a light bulb near the back door, cut off the telephone line and broke into the house.
Thompson woke up from his dream and saw someone go to the bed and put a knife rest around her neck. The man warned her not to shout, or she would be killed. Thompson pleaded, "You can take my credit card, wallet and anything in my apartment. You can also take my car. " The man said, "I don't want your money."
Thompson knew right away that she would be raped. In desperation, she decided to remember the man's face. "I tried to pay attention to his facial details. I plan that if I can survive, I can help the police bring him to justice (with these memories). "
Half an hour later, Thompson lied to the rapist that he would give him a glass of water and then took the opportunity to escape from the back door. After the man left, he raped another woman nearby.
Detective Mike Gauldin met Thompson in the hospital and drew a portrait of the criminal according to her description. Subsequently, some clues surfaced.
One of the clues is related to a young man named Ronald Cotton. He worked in a restaurant near two rape cases and had a criminal record of forced entry and sexual assault when he was young.
Three days after the rape, Gauldin took Thompson to identify the photos. He put six photos on the table and said that the criminal might be among them. Thompson immediately began to carefully identify and study each photo. She recalled afterwards that it felt like doing multiple-choice questions and choosing the answer by exclusion.
Five minutes later, she picked up Cotton's photo and said, "He raped me."
unjust imprisonment
Cotton learned from his mother's boyfriend that the police were suspicious of him. When asked if he was nervous, Cotton replied, "I'm not nervous. I just want to find out why. "
Cotton took the initiative to go to the police station to clear his name, but because he remembered the situation wrong when answering some questions about the day of the incident, the police suspected that he was lying. Cotton was detained by the police and stood in the queue of real identification.
"I'm number five," Cotton recalled. "I'm afraid, nervous, very nervous. I feel my body shaking. " This group of people were asked to "walk forward, talk and then walk back". Thompson said, "It's either the 4th or the 5th. Can I ask them to do it again? " Later, she confirmed that it was the fifth.
"I was told that this is the person I chose in photo recognition," Thompson said. "I thought," look! I made the right choice. " "
In the next week-long trial, the jury heard Cotton's defense. However, coincidentally, the clothes he wore on the day of the crime met Thompson's description; A small piece of foam on the floor of Thompson's apartment seems to have fallen from his shoes.
In court, when asked if he recognized the murderer, Thompson pointed to Cotton. "It feels like someone stabbed me with a knife," Cotton said.
After 40 minutes of discussion, the jury found Cotton guilty.
The attempt failed.
Mianhua was sentenced to life imprisonment and 50 years imprisonment. He was handcuffed and shackled and sent to North Carolina Central Prison. He is also 22 years old.
"Some people say that mature men should not cry, which is absolutely a lie," Cotton said. "Many times, I grabbed the pillow and held it in my arms, imagining that I was holding my mother, father, sister or brother, thinking that things should not be like this."
In order to cheer up, Cotton helped in the prison kitchen, joined the choir and kept writing letters to lawyers, hoping to reverse his conviction. One day, when he saw a new prisoner brought by the police, he suddenly felt deja vu.
Cotton said to the new cellmate, "I was caught by mistake. You look like the man in the painting." (Rape) Did you do it? "The new cellmate gave him a negative answer. The newcomer named Bobby Poole was also jailed for rape. Since then, Poole and Cotton have often been confused because of their similar looks.
Another cellmate told Cotton that Poole had admitted that he raped Thompson and another woman that night. Cotton's case was retried. The lawyer sided with Poole and Cotton and asked Thompson to choose again. Thompson pointed to the cotton again.
"In fact, I was very angry with the defendant (Cotton)," Thompson recalled. "How dare he question me? How dare he suspect that I have mistaken the appearance of the rapist? I will never forget this person. "
Because of this effort, Cotton was found guilty again, and his sentence was changed to two life imprisonment.
End one's grievances
Seven years later, former American football star OJ Simpson went on trial. Cotton paid attention to the whole trial process and learned a new term-"DNA testing".
Cotton wrote to his new lawyer, law professor Ricky Rosen, and applied for a DNA test. Rosen gave up hope from the beginning, because all previous efforts were proved to be in vain. Cotton is very confident.
Burlington police produced evidence that had been dusty for ten years. One of the evidences contains sperm fragments with complete DNA on them. The test results prove that Cotton is innocent, and the real rapist is Poole.
Detective Gauldin said, "I'm shocked. I can't believe it. At that time, the case had passed 1 1 year. This person (cotton) lost 1 1 year. I really feel sorry for him and his family. "
At that time, the former victim Thompson was married and had children. After learning that cotton had been wronged, she was shocked at first, and then fell into deep remorse.
Thompson said that whenever she remembered what happened on July 28th, 1984, Cotton's face still came to her eyes. In order to get rid of the shadow, she offered to go to church to meet Cotton.
"When I saw him walk into the church, I felt like I couldn't stand up," she said. "As soon as I saw him, I cried. I said, "Even if I have to say' I'm sorry' every second for the rest of my life, I can't express my inner guilt. Sorry ""
Cotton replied, "Jennifer, I forgive you. I just hope that we can spend the rest of our lives happily. "
"question" the witness
At present, 235 people in the United States, like cotton, have been cleared of suspicion through DNA testing. Most of these people are accused of sexual crimes or murder. Criminologists found that 75% of them were unjustly imprisoned because of witness mistakes.
The researchers told the reporter of CBS TV's 60 Minutes that people's memory is biased, and it is impossible for memory to record the scene at that time like a tape and play it back accurately when necessary.
Gary Wells, a psychology professor at Iowa State University, has been studying witness memory for 30 years. He thinks that the testimony of witnesses is not always reliable. For example, in the identification queue, the real murderer is not necessarily in it, and witnesses often choose the one that looks most like the real murderer.
In Cotton's case, Thompson spent five minutes identifying the criminal, and Detective Gauldin thought she was very careful. However, Wells pointed out that this identification method is incorrect. "Recognition memory is actually very short," he said. "In our research, we found that if someone does face recognition for more than 10 second or 15 second, it means that he has not used reliable recognition memory for recognition. In fact, if Thompson really wants to identify criminals, it will only be a moment. "
Wells said that when the police asked Thompson to identify the criminal, she should show her photos one by one and let her compare the faces in the photos with those in her memory, instead of comparing the photos and choosing from them.
Wells also did an experiment. He showed 300 people a fuzzy video of a criminal and then divided them into two groups. He showed the first group a set of photos, asked them to pick out the murderer, and then asked them what they saw from the video without saying anything. As a result, only 3% claimed to remember the details of the criminal's face.
Later, he asked the second group to choose the murderer from the photos, and told them that "you chose the right one", and then asked them what they saw from the video. As a result, 40% to 45% people said they saw the murderer clearly.
Wells concluded that this is the effect of suggesting and strengthening memory. When the witness identifies the photo, the police should not give the witness any hint. Therefore, it is best to have an independent team to arrange the appraisal work, even detectives should not be present.
Memory deviation
There is another unexplained problem in Cotton's case, that is, why did Thompson still think Cotton was a rapist when he saw the real murderer Poole?
Elizabeth loftus, a professor of legal psychology at the University of California, Irvine, gave an explanation. She showed the photos of A, B and C3 to Leslie Starr, a reporter of 60 Minutes, so that Starr could keep them in mind. A few minutes later, she gave Starr a test.
She first showed Starr two photos, one of which was the photo A that Starr had seen. Starr picked it out easily. Then, loftus took out a new photo and a revised photo A, and asked Starr to choose the photo she had seen. Starr chose the revised photo A, but said "not 100% sure".
Next, an incredible scene appeared. Loftus put the original photo A and the modified photo A in front of Starr at the same time, and Starr chose the modified photo A ... "These two photos are a little familiar," she admitted.
It turns out that Starr made the wrong choice. Loftus explained: "I show you the modified photo and a photo you have never seen before, just to lure you to choose the modified photo, because there is no" real murderer "here, only a falsified forger. After that, when you face the "real murderer" and the fake, your memory will be confused by the fake. " (Liu Lili)
Simpson case
1994, OJ Simpson, a former American football star and popular film actor, was accused of killing his ex-wife Nibraun and her boyfriend Goldman with a knife.
Simpson and Nibrown divorced on 1992 after seven years of marriage. They have two children. A friend of Simpson's family, who asked not to be named, thought it might be Simpson's revenge after his second failed attempt with his ex-wife.
The police conducted a five-day investigation into the case, including genetic analysis of blood samples at the scene, and charged Simpson. According to California law, Simpson may be sentenced to death if proved guilty.
After 474 days of "trial of the century", from 1995 to 10, a jury composed mainly of blacks tried Simpson not guilty after analyzing the testimony of 1 105 witnesses. This case has become the most controversial case in America.