LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Identification — Circumstantial Identification — When Formal Identification Parade Unnecessary
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where witnesses recognised their assailants in such an impromptu manner as to make any formal identification a mockery of the system, a formal identification parade is unnecessary.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Nasir, PCA (as adopted by Onu, JSC), in Eyisi & Ors v. State (2000) NLC-1601999(SC) at p. 14; Paras A–C.
"The circumstances were such that the witnesses PW2 and PW3 recognised their assailants in such an impromptu manner as to make any formal identification a mockery of the system. In my opinion, in a case like the one under consideration, where the learned trial Judge had carefully sifted the evidence, an appeal court would not interfere with such conclusion unless there was presented to the court, cogent reasons to show that the findings and conclusions were perverse."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
If witnesses recognised the accused spontaneously at the scene or soon after under circumstances that make a formal parade impractical or a mockery, a parade is unnecessary. The impromptu recognition may be more reliable than a parade. The court will not insist on a parade where the recognition was clear and immediate. The trial judge must carefully evaluate the circumstances of the recognition. The appellate court will defer to the trial judge’s findings on identification unless perverse. The principle applies where the witness had a prior acquaintance with the accused or where the encounter was distinctive. The rule prevents the prosecution from being penalised for not conducting an unnecessary parade.