[2012] EWCA Crim 1304

The fact that a victim of aggravated burglary described one of his attackers as having a "pock-marked face" and subsequently identified, in a video identification procedure, a man who did not have a pock-marked face did not render the conviction of the latter unsafe. The jury had not followed an impermissible line of enquiry in asking to see the image from which the victim had identified his attacker. The local branch of the Crown Prosecution Service had breached national policy in operating a blanket rule of not providing such images to the defence.

CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Hedley J, Calvert-Smith J)

25/05/2012