#4758 - Id Evidence - BPC Criminal Evidence

IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE Connecting Defendant to the Offence Several ways to link Defendant to the offence, includes identification of Defendant by eye-witness of crime. Eye-Witness Identification 2 types: * Identification of Defendant in court - "dock identification" * Identification of Defendant out-of-court (before trial) - Identification procedure Dock Identification Should not generally be allowed in the absence of prior Identification - flout basic principles of Identification evidence. Dock Identification may be permissible if: * Defendant refuses to attend an Identification procedure, or * Renders an Identification procedure impracticable (eg. by changing his appearance) * Summary trial Road traffic offences (as failure to call evidence that Defendant was driver - acquittal) * but if Identification issue (Defendant argues mistaken Identification) should be Identification procedure. Out-of-court Identification Referral to out-of-court Identification - way to avoid prejudice of Dock Identification Admissibility of Identification Evidence Previous out-of-court Identification admissible in all forms: s120(4)-(5) CJA 2003 (4) A previous statement by the witness is admissible as evidence of any matter stated of which oral evidence by him would be admissible, if--- (a) any of the following three conditions is satisfied, and (b) while giving evidence the witness indicates that to the best of his belief he made the statement, and that to the best of his belief it states the truth. (5) The first condition is that the statement identifies or describes a person, object or place. Caution in Mistaken Identification Cases Whenever the case against Defendant is wholly/substantially reliant on the correctness of identification which Defendant alleges is mistaken. Is a Turnbull Warning Required? Reason for Turnbull: An Identification Witness may be mistaken but convincing