Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Identifying Faces - Coggle Diagram
Identifying Faces
-
Why Identify
Primary Reason - it is the crowns responsibility to ensure the current identification of a person being brought before the courts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Photoboards - never put suspect 1 and 12 or 6 and 7 together, we have to find other distracting people of similar appearance, fairness associated with the photoboard
-
Does not refer to IDs made by expert witnesses - No section of the evidence act that deals with that
Smith v The Queen (2001) Justice Michael Kirby ruled police officers do not have specialised knowledge as per section 79 to offer an opinion based on ID Evidence
The OUTCOMES - Police officers that know the accused can no longer provide ID from surveillance footage, Issues are also raised regarding the prosecution bias with Police officers not training in ID
Honeysett v 2014 (2011)
Armed Robbery - 8 Identifying Features - Adult Male, Skinny body build, medium body height, hair is short, his head shape was more football than soccer ball, the offender was right handed, dark skin colour
Sec 79 challenged, Prof Henneberg - area anatomy yet photographic sources, should not be considered expert (46) an error of law to admit the evidence
Evidence Act 1995 deals with witness identification from ID parades and ID via photos, does not deal with forensic methods of identification
Passport Office is dealing with morphing, organised crime, smart gate can be fooled
-
Morgan v R (2011) - armed robbery, Henneberg a biological anthropologist provided ID evidence from CCTV - the method was vague, one and the same - on appeal white coat effect influence of a professor without explaining as an expert, quality of images problematic, appeal was upheld.
What is out - ID from Police and Anatomist without photographic training, police setting up facial ID units - even AFP