||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 337 (Nov)
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Rose LJ, Simon and Dobbs JJ
||Paul Cross (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.
||Julian Smith (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
||24 November 2005
Criminal evidence - Identity - Visual identification - Attempted robbery - Possibility of mistaken identification - Officers showing victim photographs of number of suspects when identity of suspect already known - Whether judge erring in declining to exclude evidence - Whether judge directing jury adequately as to effect of breach - Code of Practice for the Identification of Persons by Police Officers, para D 3.5 - , s 66. .
In all the circumstances of the instant case, the judge had been entitled in his discretion to admit evidence from a victim of an attempted robbery as to the identification of the defendant, as he had found that whilst the officers had breached of Code D of the Code of Practice for the Identification of Persons by Police Officers, the admission of the victim's evidence did not so adversely affect the fairness of the proceedings that it should not be admitted. The judge's subsequent directions to the jury on the issue of the breach and its potential significance were adequate, and it could not be said that the defendant's conviction for attempted robbery was unsafe.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary