Over 75,000 people a year are charged with crimes on the basis of eyewitness identifications, but too rarely is this evidence challenged (or suppressed). The last 30 years have created a broad, sophisticated, and well-researched consensus among social scientists that human memory is subject to specific, non-intuitive influences. More than lighting conditions and elapsed time, subjects like lineup procedures, witness confidence inflation, weapon focus, and the difficulty of cross-racial identifications headline research. Defenders now have an obligation to use this science in the courtroom to challenge jurors’ and judges’ misconceptions and, where necessary, fight bad outdated precedents.