Visual Identification evidence Flashcards
What’s NOT visual ID?
- Mere description of culprit or clothing (i.e. physical characteristics)
- Statement that culprit drove a particular vehicle, or companion of an ID’ed person
Descriptive ID
Where accuracy of ID evidence is not in issue but instead W’s honesty. What’s NOT considered in this situation?
Neither PACE Code D nor Turnbull guidelines need be considered — otherwise merely risk confusing jury by focusing on wrong issue
What’s Visual Identification?
Visual Identification from eyewitness is 1 way of proving D committed crime
Can ID issue arise even where W claims to recognise someone well known to them?
What direction should be given in these instances?
Yes, ID become an ISSUE
Even where’s the main line of defence BUT only where the possibility to a genuine mistake remains
Solution is to attack W honesty/truthfulness
- Turnbull direction where there an alleged recognised
- Code D is not useful in these instances
What safeguards should be considered where the accuracy of ID is not an issue but the honesty of W is the issue?
None (no Turnbull or code D PACE)
- risks of confusing jury by focussing on wrong issue
What are the 3 safeguards to Visual ID?
1) PACE code D
2) Turnbull Guidelines (apply at trial stage)
3) Rule against dock identification on trials on indictment
What’s the procedure PACE code D puts on place to test W’s ability to ID?
W who makes a Visual ID may be invited to take part in a CODE D procedure if police have a known suspect
- Done under controlled conditions + test the ability to ID
- Ws must provide PO descriptions so they be compared w/ original description (to test accuracy of ID)
Re: PACE Code D (consequence of breach not passing the test) - When will evidence be excluded? What’s the effect of not excluding evidence?
Excluded if:
- important safeguards have been faked (deliberately encounter W outside PS)
If evidence not excluded?
- judge must give reasons to admit evidence obtained in breach
- need to help jury understand the prejudice caused by breach and giving it weight as they think fit (e.g. W has lost the benefit of important ID safeguard)
- Not need for a voir dire
Where there’s been a breach of code D does not inevitably lead to exclusion of tainted evidence. What’s the test to assess the breach?
Whether breach may have caused significant prejudice to D?
no: no exclusion
Some prejudice may have been cause:
- is the adverse effect of admitting this evidence such that justice required the evidence to be excluded? s.78 PACE
Where there’s been a breach of visual ID evidence, what test must be considered when some prejudice may have ben caused to D?
S. 78 PACE
Consider whether adverse effect is such that justice requires the evidence to be excluded
What’s the rule against dock ID?
Dock ID refers to the identification of A for the first time during the course of the trial itself (i.e. by a W who has not previously named or identified D by means of a Code D ID procedure)
P will not invite Ws to identify D for the first time in court [on indictment] - unless?
1) W’s attendance at an earlier ID parade was unnecessary/impracticable [might be impracticable e.g. in minor summary offences],
(2) W invited to court to identify (for the first time) A from CCTV
or
(2) exceptional circumstances
Can the use of dock ID lead to successful appeals against conviction?
Yes, it may
If W makes unsolicited dock ID, what the the judge do?
Trial judge may direct jury against giving it any wight or importance
D not in custody & W identifies him at court - what happens here?
May need to be excluded, especially if considerable time has elapsed since alleged offence