Tweet
Victor,
For what its worth I believe Supt Acott had intitially been convinced of Alphon"s guilt.It is my impression that he was quite thrown when Valerie didnt pick him---because it was at that exact moment that he dropped Alphon and went back to the Vienna Hotel and requestioned Nudds and Hanratty appeared on the horizon and seemed to sort of "fit the bill ".In Acott"s mind the mystery was located in the Vienna Hotel where the cartridge cases were found,hence his next suspect, a man known to the police and with a criminal record---which Alphon did not have [save for the motorbike theft].
In my opinion what is pivotal in all this then is Valerie Storie"s identification.
It is my view that Valerie could have been mistaken the second time round too.That Valerie never actually got a good enough view of her attacker---Look again at the very similar case we discussed last week-that of Jennifer Thompson :
Known Cases of Eyewitness Error
The Innocence Project has facilitated the exoneration of 214 men who were convicted of crimes they did not commit, as a result of faulty eyewitness evidence.[5] A number of these cases have received substantial attention from the media.
Jennifer Thompson's case is one example: She was a college student in North Carolina in 1984, when a man broke into her apartment, put a knife to her throat, and raped her. According to her own account, Ms. Thompson studied her rapist throughout the incident with great determination to memorize his face. "I studied every single detail on the rapist's face. I looked at his hairline; I looked for scars, for tattoos, for anything that would help me identify him. When and if I survived the attack, I was going to make sure that he was put in prison and he was going to rot."[6]
Ms. Thompson went to the police station later that same day to work up a [composite sketch] of her attacker, relying on what she believed was her detailed memory. Several days later, the police constructed a photographic lineup, and she selected Ronald Junior Cotton from the lineup. She later testified against him at trial. She was positive it was him, without any doubt in her mind. "I was sure. I knew it. I had picked the right guy, and he was going to go to jail. If there was the possibility of a death sentence, I wanted him to die. I wanted to flip the switch."[7]
But she was wrong, as DNA results eventually showed. It turns out she was even presented with her actual attacker during a second trial proceeding a year after the attack, but swore she'd never seen the man before in her life. She remained convinced that Ronald Cotton was her attacker, and it was not until much later, after Mr. Cotton had served 11 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, that she realized that she had made a grave mistake.
Jennifer Thompson's memory had failed her, resulting in a substantial injustice. It took definitive DNA testing to shake her confidence, but she now knows that despite her confidence in her identification, it was wrong. Cases like Ms. Thompson's, including a long history of eyewitness errors traceable back to Biblical times, prompted the emergence of a field within the social sciences dedicated to the study of eyewitness memory and the causes....continued on net
Best
Norma
For what its worth I believe Supt Acott had intitially been convinced of Alphon"s guilt.It is my impression that he was quite thrown when Valerie didnt pick him---because it was at that exact moment that he dropped Alphon and went back to the Vienna Hotel and requestioned Nudds and Hanratty appeared on the horizon and seemed to sort of "fit the bill ".In Acott"s mind the mystery was located in the Vienna Hotel where the cartridge cases were found,hence his next suspect, a man known to the police and with a criminal record---which Alphon did not have [save for the motorbike theft].
In my opinion what is pivotal in all this then is Valerie Storie"s identification.
It is my view that Valerie could have been mistaken the second time round too.That Valerie never actually got a good enough view of her attacker---Look again at the very similar case we discussed last week-that of Jennifer Thompson :
Known Cases of Eyewitness Error
The Innocence Project has facilitated the exoneration of 214 men who were convicted of crimes they did not commit, as a result of faulty eyewitness evidence.[5] A number of these cases have received substantial attention from the media.
Jennifer Thompson's case is one example: She was a college student in North Carolina in 1984, when a man broke into her apartment, put a knife to her throat, and raped her. According to her own account, Ms. Thompson studied her rapist throughout the incident with great determination to memorize his face. "I studied every single detail on the rapist's face. I looked at his hairline; I looked for scars, for tattoos, for anything that would help me identify him. When and if I survived the attack, I was going to make sure that he was put in prison and he was going to rot."[6]
Ms. Thompson went to the police station later that same day to work up a [composite sketch] of her attacker, relying on what she believed was her detailed memory. Several days later, the police constructed a photographic lineup, and she selected Ronald Junior Cotton from the lineup. She later testified against him at trial. She was positive it was him, without any doubt in her mind. "I was sure. I knew it. I had picked the right guy, and he was going to go to jail. If there was the possibility of a death sentence, I wanted him to die. I wanted to flip the switch."[7]
But she was wrong, as DNA results eventually showed. It turns out she was even presented with her actual attacker during a second trial proceeding a year after the attack, but swore she'd never seen the man before in her life. She remained convinced that Ronald Cotton was her attacker, and it was not until much later, after Mr. Cotton had served 11 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, that she realized that she had made a grave mistake.
Jennifer Thompson's memory had failed her, resulting in a substantial injustice. It took definitive DNA testing to shake her confidence, but she now knows that despite her confidence in her identification, it was wrong. Cases like Ms. Thompson's, including a long history of eyewitness errors traceable back to Biblical times, prompted the emergence of a field within the social sciences dedicated to the study of eyewitness memory and the causes....continued on net
Best
Norma
Comment