Evidence 1. Jun 2012.

Part B

Question 1

a) Whether the identification evidence made by all the witness admissible.

Section 5 – Intro

Section 9 – rules of admissibility of identification evidence

“facts necessary to establish the identity of any thing or person whose identity is relevant”

Visual identification - Turnbull guideline - principle when case depends wholly or substantially on the correctness of identification of the accused – judge need to warn himself – need for caution before conviction the acc – reliance of the correctness of the identification.

With regard to Wilson identification

- His description: a short, balding guy, weigh around 60kg.

- Incident happens at night

- #Jaafar bin Ali – visual identification of poor quality

- #R v Long – visual poor - may be good if corroborated

- Whether Identification Parade is in good quality – all must hv same physical appearance with the accused –

#Mohamed b majid: [A] dark, paraded with light person-unfair

#Pasupathy: diffirent age & height = unfair

With regard to Ruff identification

- Description: slightly short and heavy guy

- Robbed at 2pm – well lighted

- Have seen the robber before

- #Dato mokhtar hashim – if already recognize the robber no need IP

- However, #PP v Richard Devadasan – want (lack) of evid of earlier identification in an IP does not affect the admissibility of the evid of identification in court – mere evid of identification – first time in court – not sufficient to sustain the conviction - no conviction can be based on identification for the first time in court – and too by a solitary witnesss.

With regard to Gina identification

- Alice telephone her – care to be taken there may be many customer to call in a day – but she meet Alice before - but facts did not said whether she talked to Alice before.

- #Teng Kam Seng – victim able to recognice acc voice as the acc had telephoned them before – identity of acc established

- If Gina had talked to Alice before, her identification may be admissible. If not, it may not be admissible – based on above case.

b) Whether statement from Ins Johnson relevant and admissible

- S32 (1) (i): statement made in the course of an investigation 

#Mohd Jamil b Yahya: though applicable, taking into consideration of the witness – carries little weight. Must be examined with greatest caution – false stories – facts cannot be verifiedthrough cross-examination of the declarant – may falsely implicate an acc.