Identification Evidence In Australia

Eyewitness Testimony

Eyewitness testimony is perhaps the most common form of identification evidence. It involves a person who claims to have seen an event or a person and can identify them in court. However, it’s important to recognise that eyewitness testimony can be fallible due to issues like stress, poor lighting, or the passage of time, leading to misidentifications.

Photographic Evidence

Photographic evidence involves the use of images or photographs to identify a suspect, victim, or a scene of crime. This may include CCTV footage, photographs taken at the scene, or images from other sources that can help establish or negate the identity of individuals involved.

Visual identification evidence is generally considered more dependable compared to picture identification evidence. According to Section 115 of the Act, picture identification evidence will not be deemed admissible if:

• The examined pictures imply that they depict individuals in police custody; or
• At the time of picture examination, the defendant was in custody, and the picture used was captured before the defendant’s apprehension, unless the defendant’s appearance has undergone a substantial transformation.
• The defendant was in custody and an identification parade could have been conducted.

Fingerprint Evidence

Fingerprint analysis is a highly reliable method of identification, which involves reports provided by expert witness. Each person’s fingerprints are unique, and matching prints found at a crime scene with those of a suspect can be compelling evidence of their presence.

DNA Evidence

DNA analysis has revolutionised criminal investigations and DNA expert evidence towards identification. It involves comparing the DNA found at a crime scene with that of a suspect or a database of known profiles. A match can conclusively link an individual to a crime, while a mismatch can exclude them as a suspect.

Voice Recognition

Voice recognition technology is becoming increasingly sophisticated. It can be used to identify a suspect based on their voice patterns, particularly in cases involving recorded conversations or phone calls. Sometimes, this type of evidence can be inadmissible evidence.

Line-ups and Show-ups

In a line-up, a witness is asked to identify a suspect from a group of people, while a show-up involves presenting a single individual for identification. Both methods are used by law enforcement to test a witness’s ability to recognise a suspect.

The Australian Law Reform Commission characterises identification parades as the most dependable form of visual identification evidence. Alternatives to an identification parade, such as having the witness observe the suspect in isolation and make a positive visual identification, carry a significant risk of bias.

The court will consider several factors when determining if it was reasonable to conduct an identification parade, including:

• The type and seriousness of the offence in question.
• The significance of the evidence.
• The feasibility of conducting an identification parade, taking into account factors such as:
• Whether the defendant cooperated in the parade, and if not, the manner, extent, and reason for the non-cooperation.
• Whether the identification occurred at or around the time of the offence.
• The appropriateness of holding an identification parade, considering factors such as the relationship (if any) between the defendant and the person making the identification.