Opinion ID: 4027532
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Stress

Text: First, high levels of stress at the time of memory formation can negatively impact a witness’ ability to accurately identify the perpetrator.123 Stressful conditions impair a witness’ ability to identify key characteristics of an individual’s face.124 A meta-analysis of the effect of high stress on eyewitness identifications found that stress hampers both eyewitness recall and identification accuracy.125 A recent study examining the effects of stress on identifications at a U.S. Military mock prisoner-of-war camp illustrates this phenomenon.126 In this study, 509 active-duty military personnel, with an average of 4.2 years in the service, underwent two types of interrogations.127 After twelve hours of confinement, participants experienced either a high-stress interrogation involving real physical confrontation followed by a low-stress interrogation without physical confrontation, or 123 See Charles A. Morgan III et al., Accuracy of Eyewitness Identification Is Significantly Associated with Performance on a Standardized Test of Face Recognition, 30 Int’l J.L. & Psychiatry 213 (2007); Kenneth A. Deffenbacher et al., A Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of High Stress on Eyewitness Memory, 28 L. & Hum. Behav. 687 (2004); Morgan et al., Accuracy of Eyewitness Memory, supra. 124 See Charles A. Morgan III et al., Misinformation Can Influence Memory for Recently Experienced, Highly Stressful Events, 36 Int’l J.L. & Psychiatry 11, 15 (2013). 125 Deffenbacher et al., Effects of High Stress, supra, at 699. 126 Morgan et al., Accuracy of Eyewitness Memory, supra, at 266. 127 Id. at 267-68. 29 vice versa.128 The interrogations were separated by approximately four hours, and about half the participants received the high-stress interrogation first, while the other half experienced the low-stress interrogation first.129 Both interrogations lasted about forty minutes.130 Twenty-four hours after the interrogations, the participants were asked to identify their interrogators from live lineups, sequential photo arrays, or simultaneous photo arrays.131 Across all identification procedures, subjects had far more difficulty accurately identifying their high-stress interrogators.132 Sixty-two percent of subjects could identify their low-stress interrogators in live lineups, while only thirty percent of subjects could accurately identify their high-stress interrogators from such lineups.133 Furthermore, fifty-six percent of subjects erroneously identified a person who was not their interrogator (false positive) during live lineups, while only thirty-eight percent of subjects did so for their low-stress interrogations.134 This study is particularly stunning when one considers that the subjects all had a prolonged and unobstructed opportunity to view their interrogators, and the interrogators were all within arm’s reach of their subjects. The subjects’ ability to see the faces of their interrogators was therefore exponentially better than the opportunity witnesses to most violent crimes have to see perpetrators. Their views were certainly better than those of Howard, Bertha, and Cameron. As the study’s authors explained, [c]ontrary to the popular conception that most people would never forget the face of a clearly seen individual who had physically confronted them and threatened them for more than 30 min[utes], . . . [t]hese data provide robust evidence that eyewitness memory for persons encountered during events that are personally 128 Id. at 268. 129 Id. 130 Id. 131 Id. at 269-70. 132 Id. at 272. 133 Id. 134 Id. 30 relevant, highly stressful, and realistic in nature may be subject to substantial error.135 Notably, this study further found that memories formed during a stressful event are highly susceptible to modifications from misinformation received after the event. That has particular relevance here given the presence of the system variables described above. Stress almost certainly affected all of the witnesses who saw Chedell Williams gunned down. The shooting undoubtedly caused Howard—the prosecution’s star witness—a significant amount of stress. Not only was she herself chased, but she also watched as the perpetrator grabbed her best friend and shot her at point-blank range. It is not surprising that multiple witnesses recalled hearing Howard screaming. Stress also likely affected Bertha’s ability to later make an accurate identification. He saw the shooter as the shooter rushed him, head on, pistol in hand. Jurors cannot properly assess eyewitness identification testimony where stress was present at memory formation unless this variable is explained to them.