LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Identification — Factors for Consideration
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The judge should direct the jury to examine the circumstances of identification: how long the witness had the accused under observation, at what distance, in what light, any impediment, whether the witness had seen the accused before, how often, any special reason for remembering, time elapsed, and any material discrepancy in description.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"Secondly, the Judge should direct the jury to examine closely the circumstances in which the identification by each witness came to be made. How long did the witness have the accused under observation? At what distance? In what light? Was the observation impeded in any way… Had the witness ever seen the accused before? How often? If only occasionally, had he any special reason for remembering the accused? How long elapsed between the original observation and the subsequent identification to the police? Was there any material discrepancy between the description of the accused given to the police by the witness when first seen by them and his actual appearance?"
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The Turnbull guidelines require the fact-finder to consider specific factors when evaluating identification evidence: duration of observation, distance, lighting conditions, obstructions, prior acquaintance with the accused, frequency of prior sightings, any special reason to remember, time between observation and identification, and consistency of description. The judge must direct the jury (or themselves) on these factors. Poor quality identification (e.g., fleeting glance, poor light, long distance) may require withdrawal of the evidence. The factors help assess reliability. The absence of a prior description or a material discrepancy weakens identification. The court must consider all factors cumulatively. The rule ensures systematic evaluation of identification evidence.