Evidence Act 1929

In a criminal trial, evidence of the identity of a person alleged to have committed an offence is not inadmissible, and is not to be excluded, merely because it was obtained other than by means of an identity parade involving a physical line‑up of persons.

In a criminal trial, evidence of the identity of a person alleged to have committed an offence obtained by means of an identity parade is to be excluded unless—

—

an audio visual record of the identity parade is made and kept in accordance with the regulations; and

if the regulations prescribe procedures for the conduct of an identity parade—the identity parade is conducted in accordance with the prescribed procedures; or

the judge is satisfied that the interests of justice require the admission of the evidence despite the failure to comply with paragraph (a).

In a criminal trial where the identity of a person alleged to have committed an offence is in issue, the judge must, if evidence of the identity of the person is admitted, inform the jury—

of the need for caution before accepting identification evidence; and

of the reasons for the need for caution, both generally and in the circumstances of the case.

In giving any such information, the judge is not required to use any particular form of words but may not suggest that identification evidence obtained from an identity parade by any means other than by a physical line‑up of persons is inherently or intrinsically less reliable than evidence obtained from an identity parade by such means.

To avoid doubt, this section does not—

make evidence admissible that would otherwise be inadmissible; or

affect the court's discretion to exclude evidence.

In this section—