Visual Identification evidence Flashcards
What is the purpose of PACE Code D
test witnesses ability to identify, under controlled conditions, any suspect the witness may claim to have seen or recgonised on a previous occassion
require witness to provide descriptions of any offender they claim to have seen to compare any subsequent descriptions against
What is NOT ‘identification evidence’ for the purpose of Turnbull
mere description of clothing or driving particular vehicle
when will Turnball warnings need to be given/not needed
not needed where ID not in issue
becomes an issue as soon as ability to recognise is questioned
even in cases of alleged recongition
how might breach of Code D be dealt with?
consider whether breach resulted in prejudice to the D then exclusion rules under s78 so great that it requires exclusion
serious breach of procedure usually results in exclusion
may also effect other form of evidence
How is dock identificaiton treated?
judge has discretion to allow it but generally unreliable - warning to be given to jury against giving it credence of necessary - Turnbull it
What are the Turnbull guidelines
whenever case against the accused depends wholly or substantially on the correctness of one or more identifications of the accused which D alleges to be mistaken - judge should warn jury of need for special caution and why
direct jury to examined circs in which ID made - ADVOKATE
remind jury of any specific weaknesses
what to do with ID evidence of good quality under Turnbull
jury can be left to assess value of identifying evidence in absence of any other supporting evidence (with warning)
what to do with ID evidence of poor quality under Turnbull
judge should withdraw case from the jury and direct acquittal UNLESS other evidence supports correctness of ID
judge to direct jury if they have adjudges anything capable of supporting evidence /not
when is a Turnbull direction used
In respect of PROSECUTION evidence where case depends wholly or substantially on visual ID
what is the importance of Turnbull
cannot pay mere lip service - must actively support jury to identify weakness in ID evidence otherwise may render verdict unsafe - applies to co-accused, where one not properly handled leaves other open to appeal
What evidence may support visual ID
any admissible form:
- bad character for previous cons - careful if they relate to reason for inclusion in ID parade
-mobile phone data
- self-incrimination
-ID by other witnesses
how will mutually supportive identifications be treated?
even where both challenged - can be treated as mutually supportive - only if of quality that jury can safely assess
evidence that undermines 1 may undermine other if in same time/place
how might self-incriminations assist
admissble confession may support disputed id - careful in cases of fabricated alibi as reason for this could be broad
what failures of the D could allow jury to draw inferences relating to ID
mention facts later relied upon
account for objects in possession or substances/marks on body
account for presence at particular place
testify at trialw
what role does ‘quality’ of the witness play
take into account eyesight
skill of individual - eg police officers trained to note apperance?
