A SUMMARY BY US EXPERTS OF BEST PRACTICE AND RESEARCH ON EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION TO BE USED AS PART OF THE APPEAL COURT CASE. THE VIEWS OF PROFESSOR ELIZABETH LOFTUS ARE PARTICULARLY PERTINENT AS HER REPORT FORMS PART OF THE APPEAL CASE.

-The longer the time between an event and memory of that event, the worse the memory.

-Psychologist studies have shown that not only does memory fade, but it becomes more vulnerable to post-event information.

-“Forgetting curves” show that we forget a good deal of information soon after we learn it, and then the loss becomes more gradual.

-In a 1967 study, it was found that after a two-hour period we manage to retain 100% of picture information, but after four months this falls to just 57% - equivalent to guessing.

- In Professor Bingham’s study for Florida State University, shop workers were exposed to “customers” engaging in strange behaviour and asked to identify them a day later. They performed so badly that the researchers shortened the delay to two hours.

- In a similar 1985 study, shop staff were asked to identify customers from selections of photographs after either two hours or 24 hours. The time delay led to a large increase in false identifications, from 15% to 52%.

- The “misinformation effect” is when people are exposed to information after an event is over and that new information can become incorporated into their memory - altering, distorting or even supplementing the original.

- In studies such as Professor Elizabeth Loftus’ about the malleability of memory, witnesses first see an event like a simulated crime or accident but are later given misleading information about what happened. When they are tested for their memories of the event, they frequently report having seen the misinformation occur.

- It is also known that if a long period of time has passed since an event, memories are even more susceptible to post-event contamination.

- In real world cases people pick up information from leading questions, being shown photographs and from media coverage.

- “Photo-biased identification” is when witnesses are exposed to photographs and then later identify individuals in person because they look familiar.

- In a 1977 study of this phenomenon, witnesses met “criminals” for 25 seconds each and were later shown a series of mugshots depicting some of these people as well as some new faces. When faced with line-up identification, people who had been shown in photographs had a 20% chance of being wrongly fingered as “criminals” compared to normal 8% chance had they not been shown.

- It has also been demonstrated, in a dissertation by Mia Cook, that the damaging effect on the original memory is likely to be greater if the photograph is one that is chosen by the witness.