My opinions only, no facts here:
I want to clear something up here.
The oft-repeated phrase that eyewitness accounts are unreliable is a myth. If this were true, life itself would become impossible for all of us. When you went to work you would not be able to recognize your boss, you could not identify your office, and you would not notice that the new employee is less than 5 feet tall or over 7 feet tall. You would not recognize your spouse when you got back home or a new bird's nest under the eaves of your house or a cold beer in your hand.
Eyewitness accounts weigh VERY heavily in criminal trials and civil trials. Yes, the prosecution will criticize those eyewitness accounts it does not like and the defense will do likewise. Also, in high-profile incidents where the powers-that-be have an agenda, there often are strong official efforts to discredit any and all witnesses.
Frankly, nothing beats an honest eyewitness.
If you were innocent of a crime and the prosecution were claiming that your DNA was all over the murder scene, wouldn't you like to have a couple eyewitnesses who factually can place you a thousand miles from the crime scene? If you were 5' 6", and accused of a crime, wouldn't you like an eyewitness who says the perpetrator was 6' 6" tall?
Eyewitness testimony becomes unreliable only when THE WRONG QUESTIONS ARE ASKED by authorities. If a witness claims that a suspect is five feet, 11 inches tall, ask them what additional item of known height did they use for scale? The answer will commonly be, nothing (so the height estimate becomes only a guess). But in some cases, the witness will say "they stood in a doorway" or "they stood next to a window" or "they stood next to a 5' 3" woman", etc.
Sleuth On!
