Eyewitness identification and legal psychology: fallibility of the testimony as a reinforcement of the Labeling Approach and violation of in dubio pro reo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v6i3.339Keywords:
Eyewitness identification, Photo identification, Criminal psychology, Labeling approach.Abstract
The present article addresses aspects of eyewitness identification in Brazil and the United States, as well as some of the factors that imply the fallibility of testimony. The main purpose of the research is to understand how does each, Brazil and the United States, treat testimonial evidence? What are some of the factors the influence the fallibility of the testimony? Finally, does the non-observance of the legal criteria in the article 226 of the Brazilian Criminal Procedure Code reinforce the Labeling Approach and criminal selectivity? The methodology applied in the research consists in literature review and the analysis of some judicial cases in which eyewitness identification was used as evidence. The specific goals of the study were to analyze the Brazilian and North American doctrinal understanding of eyewitness identification; examine how the Brazilian courts addresses the issue; research the various factors that may influence the identification; and, finally, discuss about the criminal selectivity that can be reinforced by the non-observance of the legal criteria for eyewitness identification. One can conclude that the article 226 of the Criminal Procedure Code, even though it lacks some update, should be applied in its entirety in order to avoid the influence of factors such as false memories and issues involving cross racial identification, weapon effect, among others. Respecting legal criteria is also capable to avoid the strengthening of criminal selectivity and the Labeling Approach.Downloads
References
ÁVILA, Gustavo Noronha de. Falsas memórias e sistema penal: a prova testemunhal em xeque. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Lumen Juris, 2013.
BARATTA, Alessandro. Princípios do Direito Penal Mínimo: para uma teoria dos direitos humanos como objeto e limite da lei penal. Tradução Francisco Bissoli Filho, 2003. Doctrina Penal, Argentina, ano 10, n. 87, p. 623-650, 1987.
BECKER, Howard S. Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: The Free Press, 1997.
BENSON, Christopher. The problem with eyewitness identification. Disponível em: <http://www.chicagoreporter.com/problem-eyewitness-identification/>. Acesso em: nov. 2019.
BESSNER, Ronda. Eyewitness identification in Canada. Criminal Law Quarterly, Canada, v. 25, p. 313-347, 1982-1983.
BRIGHAM, John C. The applications of eyewitness identification research to the courtroom. Journal of Community Psychology, v. 14, n. 3, p. 241-252, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629(198607)14:3<241::aid-jcop2290140303>3.0.co;2-5
BROWN, Rebecca; SALOOM, Stephen. The imperative of eyewitness identification reform and the role of police leadership. University of Baltimore Law Review, Baltimore, v. 42, p. 535-560, 2013.
CALIFORNIA INNOCENCE PROJECT. Eyewitness identification. Disponível em: <https://californiainnocenceproject.org/issues-we-face/eyewitness-identification/>. Acesso em: nov. 2019.
CECCONELLO, William Weber; AVILA, Gustavo Noronha de; STEIN, Lilian Milnitsky. A (ir)repetibilidade da prova penal dependente da memória: uma discussão com base na psicologia do testemunho. Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas, Brasília, v. 8, n. 2, p. 1057-1073, 2018. https://doi.org/10.5102/rbpp.v8i2.5312
CECCONELLO, William Weber; STEIN, Lilian Milnitsky. Prevenindo injustiças: como a psicologia do testemunho pode ajudar a compreender e prevenir o falso reconhecimento de suspeitos. Avances em Psicología Latinoamericana,
Bogotá, v. 38, n. 1, p. 172-188, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.6471
CLARK, Steven E. Blackstone and the balance of eyewitness identification evidence. Albany Law Review, Albany, v. 74, n. 3, p. 1105-1156, 2010.
CONWAY, Sara. A new era of eyewitness identification law: putting eyewitness testimony on trial. New England Law Review, Boston, v. 50, p. 81-118, 2015.
DAMÁSIO, António. O erro de Descartes: emoção, razão e o cérebro humano. São Paulo: Editora Companhia das Letras, 2012.
DIAS, Fábio Freitas; DIAS, Felipe da Veiga; MENDONÇA, Tábata Cassenote. Criminologia mediática e a seletividade do sistema penal. In: Anais do 2º Congresso Internacional de Direito e Contemporaneidade: mídias e direitos da sociedade em rede, 2013. Disponível em: <http://coral.ufsm.br/congressodireito/anais/2013/3-7.pdf>. Acesso em: nov. 2019.
DIVAN, Gabriel Antinolfi. Editorial dossiê “Criminologia e Processo Penal”: O processo penal das misérias. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Criminais, São Paulo, ano 25, n. 128, p. 17-25, fev. 2017.
DOTSON, Jared T. The linchpin of identification evidence: the unreliability of eyewitnesses and the need for reform in West Virginia. West Virginia Law Review, Morgantown, v. 117, p. 775-829, 2014.
FRANÇA, Rafael Francisco. Meios de obtenção de prova na fase preliminar criminal: considerações sobre reconhecimento pessoal no Brasil e na legislação comparada. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Policiais, Brasília, v. 3, n. 2, p. 55-90, jul./dez. 2012. https://doi.org/10.31412/rbcp.v3i2.58
GEE, Harvey. Cross-racial eyewitness identification, jury instructions and justice. Rutgers Race & Law Review, Newark, v. 11, p. 70-118, 2009.
GESU, Cristina Di. Prova penal e falsas memórias. 2 ed. amp. e rev. Porto Alegre: Livraria do Advogado Editora, 2014.
GETZ, Dana. Who was the unabomber sketch artist? ‘Manhunt: Unabomber’ claims there was more than one. Disponível em: <https://www.bustle.com/p/who-was-the-unabomber-sketch-artist-manhunt-unabomber-claims-there-was-more-than-one-78167>. Acesso em: nov. 2019.
GOFFMAN, Erving. Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Inc., 1963.
GROSS, William David. The unfortunate faith: a solution to the unwarranted reliance upon eyewitness testimony. Texas Wesleyan Law Review, Fort Worth, v. 5, p. 307- 331, 1999.
HANDBERG, Roger B. Expert testimony on eyewitness identification: a new pair of glasses for the jury. American Criminal Law Review, Washington, DC, v. 32, p. 1013-1064, 1995.
HOBSON, Zoe J.; WILCOCK, Rachel. Eyewitness identification of multiple perpetrators. International Journal of Police Science & Management, London, v. 13, n. 4, p. 286-296, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1350/ijps.2011.13.4.253
HUGENBERG, Kurt; YOUNG, Steven G.; BERNSTEIN, Michael J.; SACCO, Donald F. The categorization-individuation model: an integrative account of the other race recognition deficit. Psychological Review, Miami, v. 117, p. 1168-1187, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020463
INFOPEN. Levantamento nacional de informações penitenciárias. Brasília, 2019.
LEVERICK, Fiona. Jury instructions on eyewitness identification evidence: a re-Evaluation. Creighton Law Review, Omaha, v. 49, p. 555-588, 2016.
LIMA, Renato Brasileiro de. Manual de processo penal. Volume único. 4. ed. rev, ampl. e atual. Salvador: Ed. JusPodivm, 2016.
LOFTUS, Elizabeth F. Unconscious transference in eyewitness identification. Law and Psychology Review, Tuscaloosa, v. 2, p. 93-98, 1976.
LOPES JR., Aury; GESU, Cristina Carla Di. Falsas memórias e prova testemunhal no processo penal: em busca da redução de danos. Revista de Estudos Criminais, Porto Alegre, v. 7, n. 25, p. 59-69, 2007.
LOPES JR., Aury. Direito processual penal. 11. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2014.
MALPASS, Roy S.; DEVINE, Patricia G. Guided memory in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, Plattsburgh, v. 66, n. 3, p. 343-350, 1981. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.3.343
MARSHALL, Harvey; PURDY, Ross. Hidden deviance and the labelling approach: the case for drinking and driving. Oxford University Press, Oxford, v. 19, n. 4, p. 541-553, 1972. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1972.19.4.03a00100
MARTINI, Márcia. A seletividade punitiva como instrumento de controle das classes perigosas. MPMG Jurídico, Minas Gerais, ano III, n. 11, p. 45-47, out./nov. 2007.
MAYER, Connie. Due process challenges to eyewitness identification based on pretrial photographic arrays. Pace Law Review, New York, v. 13, n. 3, p. 815-861, 1994.
MAZONI, Ana Paula de Oliveira; FACHIN, Melina Girardi. A teoria do etiquetamento do sistema penal e os crimes contra a ordem econômica: uma análise dos crimes de colarinho branco. Revista de Direito Público, Londrina, v. 7. n. 1, p. 3-18, jan./abr. 2012. https://doi.org/10.5433/1980-511.2012v7n1p3
MELLIM FILHO, Oscar. Criminalização e seleção no sistema judiciário penal. Tese de Doutorado em Ciências Sociais – Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2009.
MONTEIRO, Felipe Mattos; CARDOSO, Gabriela Ribeiro. A seletividade do sistema prisional brasileiro e o perfil da população carcerária. Civitas, Porto Alegre, v. 13, n. 1, p. 93-117, 2013. https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7289.2013.1.12592
MOREIRA, Reinaldo Daniel. Notas sobre a seletividade do sistema penal. Revista Eletrônica da Faculdade Metodista Granberry, Juiz de Fora, v. 8, p. 1-16, 2010.
MOURER, Sarah Anne. Reforming eyewitness identification procedures under the fourth amendment. Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy, Durham, v. 3, p. 49-90, 2008.
NAUDE, Bobby. Ensuring Procedurally Fair Identification Parades in South Africa. South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Cape Town, v. 28, p. 188-203, 2015.
NORTON, Jerry E. recent appellate court decisions on eyewitness identification. Public Interest Law Reporter, Chicago, v. 11, p. 1-43, 2006.
NUCCI, Guilherme de Souza. Manual de processo penal e execução penal. 12. ed. rev., atual. e ampl. Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2015.
RABNER, Stuart. Evaluating eyewitness identification evidence in the 21st century. New York University Law Review, New York, v. 87, n. 5, p. 1249-1272, 2012.
ROBERTS, Andrew. Eyewitness identification: scene of crime confrontations - The need for a more cautious approach. The Journal of Criminal Law, Cambridge, v. 63, n. 3, p. 251-262, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1177/002201839906300305
ROSE, Chris; BECK, Victoria. Eyewitness accounts: false facts, false memories and false identification. Journal of Crime and Justice, Oshkosh, v. 39, n. 2, p. 243-263, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648x.2014.940999
SCHACTER, Daniel L.; SCARRY, Elaine; MATHER, Mara. Memory, brain and belief. The American Journal of Psychology, Chicago, v. 114, n. 3, p. 473. https://doi.org/10.2307/1423692
SHEEHAN, Christian. Making the jurors the experts: the case for eyewitness identification jury instructions. Boston College Law Review, Newton Centre, v. 52, p. 651-693, 2011.
SMALARZ, Laura; WELLS, Gary L. Eyewitness-identification evidence: scientific advances and the new burden on trial judges. Court Review, Williamsburg, v. 48, n. 1-2, p. 14-21, 2012.
STEBLAY, Nancy K. Scientific advances in eyewitness identification evidence. William Mitchell Law Review, Saint Paul, v. 41, n. 3, p. 1090-1128, 2015.
STEIN, Lilian Milnitsky. Falsas memórias: fundamentos científicos e suas aplicações clínicas e jurídicas. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2010.
STEIN, Lilian Milnitsky; ÁVILA, Gustavo Noronha de. Entrevistas forenses e reconhecimento pessoal nos processos de criminalização: um diagnóstico brasileiro. Brasília: IPEA. Boletim de Análise Político-Institucional, n. 17, p. 45-51, 2018.
THOMPSON, Sandra Guerra. Beyond a reasonable doubt – Reconsidering uncorroborated eyewitness identification testimony. University of California, Davis, v. 41, p. 1487-1545, 2008.
TORTORA, Jason. Reconsidering the standards of admission for prior bad acts evidence in light of research on false memories and witness preparation. Fordham Urban Law Journal, New York, v. 40, p. 1493-1537, 2013.
TRENARY, Amy D. State v. Henderson: A model for admitting eyewitness identification testimony. The University of Colorado Law Review, Boulder, v. 84, n. 4, p. 1257-1303, 2013.
VALENTINE, Tim; MESOUT, Jan. Eyewitness identification under stress in the London dungeon. Applied Cognitive Psychology, v. 23, n. 2, p. 151-161, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1463
WALSH, Dana. The dangers of eyewitness identification: a call for greater state involvement to ensure fundamental fairness. Boston College Law Review, Newton Centre, Symposium Issue, v. 54, p. 1415-1453, 2013.
WELLS, Gary L.; SMALL, Mark; PENROD, Steven; MALPASS, Roy S.; FULERO, Solomon M.; BRIMACOMBE, C.A.E. Eyewitness identification procedures: recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, Washington, DC, v. 22, n. 6, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025750605807
ZAFFARONI, Eugenio Raul. A questão criminal. Tradução Sérgio Lamarão. 1. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Revan, 2013.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As of 2022, articles published in the RDPP are licensed under Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional. rticles published until 2021 adopted the Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
How to Cite
