18. Visual Identification Evidence Flashcards
what safeguards are in place for visual ID evidence?
- PACE code D
- prohibition of dock identification
- Turnbull rules
what is NOT identification evidence
- mere description
- description where ID not in. dispute
is turnbull required in cases of recognition?
yes as a general rule
when is turnbull and code D not needed?
if the accuracy of a purported identification is not in issue
effect of breach of PACE code D?
not automatic exclusion of ev however ev may be tainted.
if significant prejudice to D - consider exclusion under s.78 (whether adverse effect would be such that justice requires the evidence to be excluded).
when must judge give reasons for admitting ID evidence?
must give reasons for admitting ev where pace code D was breached
How will a failure to observe code D be dealt with by jury direction?
The jury must ordinarily be told ‘that an identification procedure enables suspects to put the reliability of an eye-witness’s identification to the test, that the suspect has lost the benefit of that safeguard, and that they should take account of that fact in their assessment of the whole case, giving it such weight as they think fit’
what is dock Identification?
where witness who has not previously named or ID’d D identifies accused for first time during trial.
when can dock ID be used?
witness’s attendance at a parade was unnecessary or impracticable, or there are exceptional circumstances.
what happens if witness makes a dock ID without pros eliciting it?
judge should warn jury against giving it any credit / weight
when is a turnbull guideline required?
When case depends wholly or substantially on correctness or one or more Id’s of accused which defence allege to be mistaken
what will judge warn jury of where turnbull required?
need for caution in reliance on correctness of ID
make reference to possibility that number of witnesses can be mistaken and
mistaken witness can be convincing
what circs will judge tell the jury to look at when considering ID made?
- how long they had accused
- distance
- lighting
- whether observation impeded
- have they seen them before?
- how often
- special reason for remembering them?
- time between original sight and ID to police
- material discrepancy between description of accused and actual appearance
- any specific weaknesses appeared in ID
- mistakes in recognition can be made
are turnbull directions given for defence ID witnesses?
no
absence of turnbull direction will…
lead to quash unless other evidence overwhelming
do the turnbull guidelines apply to ID of motor vehicles?
no
how does a judge deal with evidence supporting disputed ID?
identify evidence and warn jury against reliance on anything that might appear supportivve without really having that capability.
can identifications be treated as mutually supportive?
yes, only if IDs are of a quality that a jury can safely be left to assess.
can ID be mutually supportive for different offences?
yes, however evidence that undermines one ID must undermine other. Weak ID in one case cannot be saved by strong ID in another case.
when can ID be supported by self-incriminated lies/false alibis?
only when jury satisifed that sole reason for fabrication was to deceive them.
before lies can be supportive of ID they must…
be shown to be deliberate and material and must be proved by evidence and all innocent motives must be discounted
do adverse inferences under CJPO support ID evidence?
not by themselves, but they can be used to infer that prosecution evidence is correct and D has no answer to it
how does quality of witness affect reliability of ID?
some witnesses are more reliable than others - e.g. police more observant than ordinary witness
when will judge stop trial based on inadequate ID?
turnbull requires judge to direct acquittal where ID ev is both deficient and unsupported by alternative evidence.
if necessary D should be invited to make submissions.
can D be convicted on qualified ID evidence?
no
what is qualified ID evidence?
a witness may have qualified an identification by admitting that being ‘not quite certain’, or was only ‘90 per cent sure’.
