Introduction
Police identification procedures are fundamental components of criminal investigations, governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and its accompanying Code D. They establish the methods by which suspects are identified by witnesses, ensuring fairness and reliability in the identification process. The primary identification procedures include video identification, identification parades, group identification, and confrontations. Each procedure has specific requirements designed to protect the rights of suspects and uphold the integrity of the investigation. Legal advisers play a significant role in overseeing these procedures to ensure compliance with legal standards and to safeguard their clients' interests.
Types of Identification Procedures
Video Identification
Under PACE Code D, video identification is the preferred method for identifying suspects. It involves showing a witness a video sequence containing images of the suspect and at least eight other individuals who resemble the suspect in appearance and age. This method minimizes the potential for inadvertent influence and improves the fairness of the identification process.
Process and Legal Considerations
-
Selection of Images: The images used must depict individuals who are similar in appearance to the suspect, ensuring that the suspect does not unduly stand out.
-
Conducting the Procedure: The procedure must be conducted by an identification officer who is independent of the investigation. The witness views the video in controlled conditions, without any suggestion or influence from officers.
-
Documentation: A full record of the procedure must be maintained, including the images shown and any comments made by the witness.
Failure to meet these requirements may result in the exclusion of the identification evidence under Section 78 of PACE. In R v Alexander and McGill [1995] Crim LR 94, the court emphasized the importance of strict compliance with Code D to ensure the reliability of identification evidence.
Identification Parades
An identification parade involves the physical presentation of the suspect alongside others of similar appearance. This traditional method requires meticulous organization to maintain fairness and prevent the suspect from being singled out.
Key Requirements and Legal Considerations
-
Composition of the Parade: The parade must include the suspect and at least eight other individuals who resemble the suspect in age, height, and general appearance.
-
Procedural Safeguards: The suspect is allowed to choose their position in the lineup, and witnesses view the parade independently to avoid influencing each other's identification.
-
Record Keeping: Detailed records, including photographs of the parade and notes on the witness's observations, are essential.
The Turnbull guidelines, established in R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224, provide criteria for judges to assess the reliability of identification evidence, considering factors such as the duration and conditions under which the witness observed the suspect. These guidelines are critical when advising clients on challenging identification evidence.
Group Identification
Group identification occurs when the witness observes the suspect among a group of people in a public place. This method is used when the suspect is unwilling to participate in a video identification or identification parade.
Procedural Guidelines and Legal Aspects
-
Selection of Location: The setting must be one where the suspect would ordinarily be present, ensuring that the identification is fair and unobtrusive.
-
Witness Instructions: Witnesses must be instructed not to discuss the identification with others and should be informed that the suspect may or may not be present.
-
Documentation: Accurate records of the procedure, including the time, location, and the individuals present, must be maintained.
Although group identification is less formal, following procedural requirements is essential. In R v Milton [2001] EWCA Crim 1854, the court highlighted the necessity of fairness in group identifications, reinforcing that deviations from proper procedures could undermine the identification's credibility.
Confrontation
Confrontation involves the direct presentation of the suspect to the witness. It is employed only when other identification procedures are impracticable.
Conditions for Use and Legal Risks
-
Last Resort: Confrontation should be used only when video identification, identification parades, and group identification are not feasible.
-
Procedural Requirements: The suspect must be informed of the procedure and has the right to have legal representation present.
-
Risk of Prejudice: Due to the inherently suggestive nature of confrontation, it carries a higher risk of misidentification. Courts scrutinize this method closely to ensure the suspect's rights are protected.
In R v Popat [1998] 2 Cr App R 208, the court stressed that confrontation should be avoided unless absolutely necessary, and any failure to observe proper safeguards could lead to exclusion of the evidence.
Role of the Legal Adviser
Legal advisers have a key responsibility in ensuring that identification procedures are conducted fairly and in accordance with legal requirements. They must protect their clients' rights at every stage of the process.
Pre-Procedure Counseling
Before the identification procedure, legal advisers should:
-
Inform the Client: Explain the nature of the procedure and its potential implications.
-
Advise on Participation: Discuss the client's options regarding participation and the possible consequences of refusal.
-
Prepare the Client: Ensure the client understands their rights and what to expect during the procedure.
During the Procedure
Legal advisers should be present to:
-
Observe the Procedure: Monitor the conduct of the identification to ensure compliance with PACE Code D.
-
Raise Objections: Immediately address any irregularities or breaches of procedure.
-
Document Concerns: Keep detailed notes of any issues that arise for use in potential challenges to the evidence.
Post-Procedure Analysis
After the procedure, advisers must:
-
Evaluate the Process: Assess whether the procedure was conducted properly.
-
Consider Challenges: Determine if there are grounds to challenge the identification evidence under Section 78 of PACE.
-
Advise on Strategy: Counsel the client on the implications of the identification and the next steps in their defense.
Conclusion
Confrontation as an identification method presents significant complexities due to its inherently suggestive nature. Following procedural safeguards is essential to prevent prejudice against the suspect. The legal principles established in cases such as R v Popat [1998] 2 Cr App R 208 highlight the judiciary's scrutiny of confrontations.
Key technical principles governing identification procedures are encapsulated in PACE Code D and reinforced by case law. The Turnbull guidelines provide a framework for assessing the reliability of identification evidence, emphasizing factors such as the witness's opportunity to observe the suspect and the conditions of the observation.
The interaction between these concepts is substantial. Legal advisers must be familiar with the procedural requirements while vigilantly protecting their clients' rights. For example, failing to challenge a procedural breach during a video identification could result in unreliable evidence being admitted, adversely affecting the client's case.
Specific requirements demand that legal advisers remain proactive throughout the identification process. This includes ensuring that the procedures are conducted fairly, raising timely objections, and being prepared to challenge the admissibility of evidence where appropriate. A sound understanding of these aspects is essential for effective legal representation and upholding the integrity of the criminal justice system.
