As alarming as it sounds, innocent people are convicted of crimes all the time.

According to the Innocence Project, the most common reason for false convictions is eyewitness misidentification. Nationwide, 69% of DNA exonerations involved some aspect of incorrect identification. Factors such as stress, anxiety, limited observation time, poor vantage points, and cross-racial identifications all contribute to these errors.

Studies show that people are notoriously inaccurate at identifying strangers who are not of their own race. This difficulty with cross-racial identification is not tied to racism; rather, it reflects how our brains are wired from youth to recognize family groups.

Another major contributor to wrongful convictions is the reliance on discredited or overemphasized forensic sciences. Often referred to as “junk science,” these unreliable disciplines have led to a large—but unquantifiable—number of false convictions. While innocence projects and conviction integrity units across the country are reviewing old cases for junk science, there is currently no nationwide program ensuring that every conviction was based on reliable evidence. Examples of junk science include bite mark analysis, shaken baby syndrome, polygraphs, tire tread comparisons, and microscopic hair analysis.

Misconduct by officials also plays a significant role in wrongful convictions. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, misconduct contributed to 79% of DNA exoneration cases involving homicide in 2018. Misconduct can take many forms, including coerced false confessions, withholding of exculpatory evidence, fabrication of evidence, and inadequate legal representation.

False accusations based on “snitch testimony” were present in about 15% of DNA exoneration cases nationwide, according to the Innocence Project. Snitch testimony often comes from criminals or criminal defendants who provide false information in exchange for favorable treatment. Unfortunately, juries are often unaware of the incentives behind these accusations, resulting in convictions of innocent people.

Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio – Cloud-Based Legal Technology.

Written by:

Laurence Colletti