The Domican identification evidence directions are satisfied where the trial judge cautions the jury about the possibility of honest mistake, draws attention to the circumstances and duration of contact, the opportunity for reliable recognition, and the stressful conditions of the identification. The observations in R v Marshall about identification evidence given with force and assurance do not establish a mandatory component of the identification warning. A trial judge may draw the jury's attention to the absence of independent evidence supporting an alibi without reversing the onus of proof, provided the direction is framed in terms of a gap in the evidence rather than as a Jones v Dunkel inference.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.