Identification Procedures Under PACE Code D

Eyewitness identification evidence has long been recognised as one of the most unreliable forms of evidence, and misidentification was a factor in several high-profile miscarriages of justice in the latter half of the twentieth century. Code D of the PACE Codes of Practice sets out detailed rules for how identification evidence must be obtained to minimise the risk of error and ensure fairness to suspects.

Where a witness has purported to identify a suspect or states that they could identify a person involved in an offence, an identification procedure must be held before the suspect is charged (unless it is impractical or it would serve no useful purpose). The preferred method in most cases is video identification (VIPER: Video Identification Parade Electronic Recording), in which the suspect is shown alongside at least eight images of other people of broadly similar appearance. The witness views the sequence independently, without prompting, and any identification or non-identification is carefully recorded.

Other permitted identification procedures include: identification parades (now uncommon due to practical difficulties); group identification, where the suspect is seen as part of a group in a public place; and confrontation, which is used only where other methods are impracticable and involves the witness being shown the suspect directly. The choice of procedure and any disagreement between the identification officer and the suspect or their solicitor must be recorded in the investigation file.

A suspect's solicitor has the right to observe a video identification procedure and to object to any of the images used if there is a material difference between them and the suspect's appearance at the time of the alleged offence. The procedure must be conducted by an identification officer who is not involved in the investigation. Where an identification procedure has not been held, or has not been held properly, the court may exclude any identification evidence under section 78 of PACE. The leading case on identification evidence remains R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224, which requires judges to warn juries of the particular dangers of acting on identification evidence that they do not find to be of good quality.