In almost all criminal cases, eyewitnesses are used in order to build a case for someone’s innocence or guilt. Should eyewitness accounts be the sole evidence used to convict the accused? Explain your view.

Explanation:

No never.

There is a famous psychology experiment where people sit in classroom in such a way that the person on either side of you can't hear what you say. This works best with more than 20 people.

The first person composes a sentence that has 3 facts in it. He whispers it to the second person who relays it to the third until the last person is told. The point of the experiment is to show that the last person isn't normally able to correctly repeat the 3 facts. In fact, most often what is given is quite mixed up and incorrect.

That's what's wrong with eye witness accounts. You can be certain of what you saw. You can also get it all mixed up.

explanation:

okay now i don't know this but for the pints nothing else to say bye