Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2005] All ER (D) 337 (Nov)
Court: Court of Appeal, Criminal Division

Rose LJ, Simon and Dobbs JJ

Representation Paul Cross (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.
  Julian Smith (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
Judgment Dates: 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. .

The Case

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.

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