About Truth Yet Told - The Case of James Harrod

Two types of line-ups were used by the prosecution in an attempt to prove the identification of James Harrod as the suspect identified by their witness. The first was the photo line-up also known as the “six pack” method, where the witness views several photos at one time. This has been the traditional method used by most states.

It was using this method that the state’s witness (Debbie Nolan) made an identification, it was an individual named James Major, not James Harrod.

The physical line-up was the second type of line-up done by the prosecution. This involves the witness doing a live viewing of a potential suspect. It must be noted that at this point Debbie Nolan had already viewed James Harrod’s photo and this should have been cause to disallow the line-up.

The line-up was conducted by the prosecution with Detective Reynolds of the Phoenix Police hand picking the participants.

• He avoided anyone who fit the description given by Debbie Nolan
• One individual was 19 years younger than James
• Another was at least a head shorter than James

The line-up went on and on with Nolan repeatedly going back and forth looking at the individuals in the line-up. She also requested to see the participants walk as she had noted “the walk” of the person she claims to have met. This went on and on until Detective Reynolds of Phoenix Police Department led her “repeatedly” back to number five, James Harrod.

The focus of the physical line-up was based on the witness’ statement that she had a face-to-face meeting with the suspect and could immediately identify the suspect. She based this on her background in both art and photography. This should of allowed her to make an identification immediately, but she could not!

Debbie’s best identification was to say, “feels number five resembles.” This was the best she could say after previously seeing James Harrod in photos, and possibly in the newspaper before the physical line-up. During numerous interviews she had stated absolutely no doubt she could identify the suspect, when helping draft a composite picture for the police. Her viewing distance was literally a few feet away and she could not positively identify James Harrod. Yet time and time again she was led back to James by Detective Reynolds.

There are numerous problems with this procedure that should have made it inadmissible and should of raised serious questions as to the reliability of the witness. Having seen James Harrod in a photo line-up “six pack” should have been enough to preclude a physical line-up since it would bias any identification.

Another noticeable differencein this line-up was the use of a powerful stun belt, which the state insisted be worn by James Harrod. This was done even though the witness was located in a separate room with police and county sheriffs present.

Courts have to establish a major security issue exists before a defendant is required to wear a stun belt. Requiring James Harrod to wear such a noticeable device while the witness is in another room with Phoenix police and sheriff deputies was done to bias the process.

The placement of the line-up is called the “two-five” line-up. Nationwide line-ups are done placing targeted suspects in either the number two or five position as this has been determined to be the highest percentage of placements by police to obtain an identification. Detective Reynolds took extra steps to insure James Harrod was in the number five position and repeatedly led Debbie Nolan to number five.

The greatest cause of wrongful convictions is attributed to misidentification. Just this year the New Jersey Supreme Court has ordered a complete change in the way eyewitness ID’s are conducted. “The current system is not reliable and failed to deter police misconduct and overstates jurors’ reliability to evaluate the evidence” according to the court.