Although the computerized facial composite system has improved over the years by developing more realistic faces, the witness identification process revolves around many factors that contribute to the inaccuracy of the identification (Carson, Milne, Pakes, Shalev & Shawyer, 2007). The problems don’t seem to be in regards to the software offered by the systems but rather in the facial composite process (Rogers, 2007). The use of computerized facial composite systems requires a procedural process that provides the participants to make accurate choices. However, these procedures are not fully used by the law enforcement which can disrupt the outcome. In a survey, law enforcement agencies were asked if a standard witness interviewing procedure was used for the creating of a facial composite, 55% of officers reported using a standard procedure and 45% did not, this result was also consistent across jurisdictions (McQuiston-Surrett, Topp, & Malpass, 2006). The percentage of agencies not using any type of procedure significantly affects the accuracy of the result. This is an ethical problem because it does not provide an even playing field for witnesses. The composite system is largely used as an elimination system rather than an exact portrait of the suspect which is often misunderstood. Dr. Harry Wechsler, an expert on biometrics and face recognition at George Mason University, believes that although there are issues regarding the system efficiency increases with the use of facial composite systems because law enforcement is able to narrow down the number of suspects which therefore increases the accuracy (Rogers, 2007). Wechsler stated, “Numerous factors affect the accuracy of eyewitness composites: A delay following the event, exposure time to the subject, target distinctiveness, emotion, stress, all play an important role in the composite produced” (Rogers, 2007). These factors are a social problem with the use of the computerized facial composite systems because it is not the technology that is inaccurate but rather the amount of pressure and reliability given to a witness. A major concern with facial composite systems is the potential for negative consequences of a bad composite (Rogers, 2007). Having an inaccurate composite can lead to social and legal problems such as wrongfully accusing a suspect and imprisoning an innocent person.