Headlined “False Conviction Study Points to the Unreliability of Evidence,” the New York Times ran a story about the study, which

“examined 200 cases in which innocent people served an average of 12 years in prison. A few types of unreliable trial evidence predictably supported wrongful convictions. The leading cause of the wrongful convictions was erroneous identification by eyewitnesses, which occurred 79 percent of the time.”

Discuss briefly. Is eyewitness evidence unreliable? What’s missing from the story?