Identification evidence obtained by presenting a suspect alone to a witness is admissible, even without an identification parade or photoboard, though its weight may be affected. The discretion to exclude is enlivened by bad faith, impropriety, or sufficiently serious unfairness, but operational exigencies may justify the procedure adopted. Where the identification task is to distinguish between two known occupants rather than to pick out a stranger from a group, the absence of a parade or photoboard is less significant. McKechnie J's dissent provides a detailed framework for analysing the cumulative effect of deficiencies in identification evidence when assessing whether a verdict is unsafe.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.