Question: How can I respond to my classmates post? I personally do not feel like eye witness testimony alone should be enough for trial. Eye witness testimony should be more like supporting evidence and not sole evidence because of how many times innocent people have been convicted for crime they did not commit. A. Randolph Hughe quoted The Innocence Project reporting " that mistaken eyewitness identifications contributed to 71% of the more than 360 cases overturned by post-conviction DNA evidence". I agree with the video that double blind administration is a really good idea and I can see how adding the administrator to be blind too would be beneficial. Dario N. Rodriguez and Melissa A. Berry state "administrators who know the identity of the suspect in a lineup may inadvertently steer witnesses' decisions in accordance with their hypothesis (i.e., that the suspect is the perpetrator of a given crime). For example, if a witness is unable to choose between identifying the suspect or a filler (i.e., known innocent lineup member used to "fill out" a lineup), a single-blind administrator might ask about how the suspect's appearance matches the witness's memory, but not ask such questions regarding the filler's appearance, cueing to the witness which lineup member he or she should identify". I would think an eyewitness would be more reliable this way because there would be no way the administrator would know which is the suspect so that they do not influence the eye witness.