Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 73 (Oct)
Court: Court of Appeal, Criminal Division

Rose LJ, Pitchers and Treacy JJ

Representation Richard Horwell (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Attorney General.
  The defendant did not appear and was not represented.
Judgment Dates: 7 October 2002


Criminal evidence - Video recording - Witness recognising defendant on video recording and identifying him as suspect - Video recording available to jury - Whether evidence of witness of identification by way of recognition admissible in circumstances.

The Case

When a suspect was filmed committing an offence, the evidence of identification by way of recognition from a witness, not present at the scene, but who knew the defendant and who, having seen the film, identified the suspect as being the defendant, was not inadmissible because the film could be played to the jury without calling the witness.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.