The Illinois Field Study: A Significant Contribution to Understanding Real World Eyewitness Identification Issues
- 201 Downloads
The Illinois Pilot Program on Eyewitness Identification
In 2006, Illinois law enforcement released the Report to the Illinois Legislature: Illinois Pilot Program on Sequential, Double-Blind Lineup Procedures (“Illinois Pilot Report”), setting forth the data from a year-long, multi-jurisdictional field study examining the efficacy of the sequential, double-blind lineup method. The Illinois data showed that the sequential, double-blind lineups had a known error rate, measured by filler identifications, of 9.2%, whereas the traditional (i.e., simultaneous, non-blind) lineups had a known error rate, also measured by filler identifications, of 2.7%.
The Illinois Pilot Report represents a significant advancement in the study of eyewitness identification. Prior to the Illinois Pilot Report, the advocates of the sequential, double-blind lineups relied upon laboratory studies to support calls for policy changes in eyewitness identification. Some practitioners viewed the laboratory studies with...
KeywordsEyewitness identification Lineups Sequential presentation Double-blind lineups Field studies
- Ebbesen, E., & Finklea, K. (2006). In response to the Illinois Pilot Project on simultaneous v. sequential lineups. Loyola University School of Law Public Interest Law Reporter, 11(2), 9–12, 27–30.Google Scholar
- Illinois Pilot Report (2006). Report to the Illinois Legislature: Illinois Pilot Program on Sequential, Double-Blind Lineup Procedures, www.il.state.us.gov; www.chicagopolice.org.Google Scholar
- Klobuchar, A., Steblay, N., & Caligiuri, H. (2006). Improving eyewitness identifications: Hennepin county’s blind sequential lineup pilot project. Cardozo Public Law, Policy and Ethics Journal, 4, 381–413.Google Scholar
- Malpass, R. (2006). Notes on the Illinois Pilot Program on sequential double blind identification procedures. Loyola University School of Law Public Interest Law Reporter, 11(2), 5–8, 39–41.Google Scholar
- Schacter, D., Dawes, R., Jacoby, L., Kahneman, D., Lempert, R., Roediger, H., & Rosenthal, R. (2007). Policy Forum: Studying eyewitness investigations in the field, Law and Human Behavior, 31(5) (this issue).Google Scholar
- Steblay, N. (2007, February). Harvard Law Institute Webconference.Google Scholar
- Wells, G. L. (2006, April). New policies, new practices: Fresh perspectives on eyewitness identification, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law Conference.Google Scholar