PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

Identification may take various forms: visual identification, voice identification, identification parade, fingerprints, handwriting, palm prints, photographs, or recollection of features by a witness who saw the culprit in the act.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Ogundare, JSC (adopting Nnaemeka-Agu, JSC in State v. Aibangbee), in Eyisi & Ors v. State (2000) NLC-1601999(SC) at p. 36; Paras D–G.
"Identification may take various forms-visual identification, voice identification… identification parade, etc… Identification means a whole series of facts and circumstances for which a witness or witnesses associate a defendant with the commission of the offence charged. It may consist of or include evidence in form of finger prints, handwriting, palm prints, voice, identification parade, photographs, or the recollection of the features of the culprit by a witness who saw him in the act of commission which is called in question or a combination of two or more of these."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

Identification evidence is not limited to formal identification parades. It includes various forms: visual, voice, fingerprints, handwriting, palm prints, photographs, and recollection of features. The witness may identify the accused through any combination of these. The court must evaluate the quality and reliability of the identification evidence. The principle recognises that identification can be established through multiple evidentiary means. The absence of an identification parade does not automatically make identification evidence unreliable. The court examines the totality of circumstances. The Turnbull guidelines apply to all forms of identification. The principle prevents rigid adherence to a single method of identification. The key is the reliability of the evidence, not the form.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE