Opinion, Identification

Question 1

expert opinion

Answer 1

An expert must be proved to be an expert, be testifying in there area of expertise and must not be deciding the ultimate issue that the court is required to decide Makita v Sprowles

There must be a direct logical connection between some relevant proven fact in the case and the expertise of the witness Dasreef v Hawchar

Question 2

non-expert opinion

Answer 2

When the witness cannot testify without giving some opinion… R v Holmes; Or,
an expert by experience Weal v Bottom

Question 3

visual id evidence of an accused

Answer 3

ID evidence is of very little value at trial when the witness has not seen the accused since the event in question
ID should be made as soon as possible after the event by way of an ID parade.
An old fashioned ID parade is still the preferred method of ID when feasible Alexander v R

Question 4

What is a judge required to do in cases where there is visual ID evidence?

Answer 4

give a Domican direction which informs the jury of the general hazards of ID evidence and the specific points of concern in the present case, urge the jury to seek corroborative evidence before relying too heavily on the evidence Domican v R

Question 5

when is it appropriate to call an expert witness

Answer 5

when matters are beyond the common knowledge of the judge and jury, an expert opinion may more readily allow a court to understand the facts upon which the opinion is based.

Question 6

In what situations may a judge warn a jury

Answer 6

Domican - required in all cases involving identification evidence
Longman - in cases where the accused has been prevented from mounting an adequate defence (20 year gap between date of the alleged offence and the trial).
McKinney - Improperly obtained evidence.

Question 7

what is the best form of identification evidence?

Answer 7

recognition