Yes, I strongly agree that Mr. Briggs is held as a victim who is falsely identified, and there are many points that prove this belief. First off, the description of the ladies don’t hit any key points or special characteristics of their attacker. Things such as his way of speech (Mr. Briggs stutter) should have been one of the first descriptions given because in the middle of an attack you realistically don’t analyze the person, you try to fight them back: Their voice should stand out if it has a distinctive quality like Mr. Briggs stuttering, and the second social worker who was whispered in the ear by her attacker along with the university student and first attorney who were demanded by their attacker should have all realized his unique voice. They also informed us that his hairline could possibly be receding, but any evidence that is uncertain is not good evidence. You can tell the difference between a receding hairline, and if it isn’t sure they should leave it alone because it could possibly lead to accusing someone else who is innocent from an unclear description. When the women were choosing their attacker from the line up, they themselves confessed that they were not positive, but they chose someone who was SIMILAR to looking like their attacker. His hair length is off as well because the women stated that he had a short afro, but Mr. Briggs has long, curly hair. Hair grows .5 inches per month and there was a 3 month lapse between the crimes and the arrest. Therefore, a short afro can not drastically grow into long and curly hair with a 1.5 inch growth. Secondly, how could each woman give the same description if one was hit in the head from the back and the only realization she assumed she had of her attacker was him hiding in a dark alley. She can not be certain that he was her attacker, but since it seemed like he was up to no good it was presumed that he was. If it’s dark she can't see any features nonetheless give a description about someone who she was knocked out by before looking at. Mr. Vance also couldn’t have had a clear look at the suspect or say he’s “absolutely positive of his identification” if he bolted out the door. No one is that perfect at capturing a face of a run away attacker unless it was his profession, but he still chose Mr. Briggs with an unclear, complete feature of the attacker. Thirdly, no evidence was found in Mr. Briggs home that had any relevance to the crimes. There was also no class evidence such as a footprint, cloth fiber, a knife, that was repeatedly mentioned that their attacker would stab them with, was mentioned to connect him to the crime. Individual evidence was not clear in the crime as well, so that makes the overall attempt to accuse Mr. Briggs guilty weak.
Lastly, the biggest stump in the investigation is when the victims indicate Mr. Briggs “nervous” tone after listening to his voice after their accusations. This resembles how our brains will always choose a similar figure if we are required to choose between many individuals even if it isn’t the exact person who committed the crime, and once we have picked our suspect our brain replaces that individual to be the “absolutely right” suspect. Even though they are saying that they are unsure if they’re correct, they still state that they are positive. After a shaky, unsure, and unclear suspicion upon Mr. Briggs like this should not end up with a guilty sentence.