Re: Identification Evidence was: Re: Bad idea: Punishing false accusers

David Lee Kollberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message:
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 

> "Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>> My suggestion would be that identification evidence be given less
>> weight. There's a lot to indicate that it's not terrifically
>> reliable. 
> 
> I see things the same way.
> 
> While in most criminal cases identification by the pursuer or a
> witness is regarded as very (or even the most) important evidence, it
> is undeniably also one of the least reliable.
> 
> Then again, what type of evidence are we going to replace it with?

Why does it have to be replaced?

> What category of evidence deserves the predicate "most important"?

It's usually the case that the sum total of evidence is considered.  i'm 
not suggesting that id evidence be dismissed, but it clearly isn't enough 
by itself - however, it seems to be a tendency of people (ie juries) to 
regard it as unequivocal.  It's not.

> What type of evidence should be regarded as reliable and crucial *and*
> is habitually readily available? Maybe a system of points would be
> helpful (where for example witness identification gets 2 points and
> DNA identification gets 8 points, and so on).

Personally, i don't like the sound of that.  If that were the case we 
could do away with juries altogether, and try defendants by abacus.
 
> When you write off or diminish the significance of a specific category
> of evidence, it's of course understandable that even more criminals
> are going to get away with it, but perhaps that is the price we need
> to pay to ensure that as few people as possible are innocently
> convicted. 

i've said it before, and as unfortunate as it is, a lot of rape cases 
have no place in court.  It is in the nature of the crime that many, even 
genuine cases do not provide the necessary objective evidence for a 
conviction to be (honestly and beyond reasonable doubt) possible:  and 
lowering the standard of proof required, to 'address' this situation, is 
not acceptable.  It cannot be fairly addressed - it's just too bad.  The 
alternative is, imo, far worse.
 
> DLK

-- 
Neil