It was quite unnecessary for a trial judge faced with issues about the quality or probative value of identification evidence to hold a trial-within-a-trial. The normal procedure was that laid down in Turnbull, where the court ‘made it abundantly clear that, where evidence of identification is such that it would be unsafe for a jury to rely on it, the judge should intervene’. After citing a passage from Turnbull regarding the basis and nature of the court’s intervention, the court icontinued: ‘In the normal way the trial judge will make his assessment whether he needs to take the action referred to by the Lord Chief Justice either at the end of the case for the prosecution or after all the evidence in the case has been called. There may be exceptional cases where the position is so clear on the depositions that he can give a ruling at an earlier stage’.
Citations:
(1986) 86 CAR 33
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Turnbull and Another etc CCA 9-Jun-1976
The defendants appealed against their convictions which had been based upon evidence of visual identification.
Held: Identification evidence can be unreliable, and courts must take steps to reduce injustice. The judge should warn the jury of . .
Cited by:
Cited – Davies v Regina CACD 29-Oct-2004
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He said the identification was partial and weak, being of a partial face and two spoken words. It was objected that his counsel had wrongly failed to object to its admission.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.219070