Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
All the persons on the parade should be of the same nationality as that of the
suspected person.
ii)
As far as possible they should be from the same station in life as that of the
suspected person.
iii)
iv)
The police ought not, either directly or indirectly, do anything which might
prevent the identification being absolutely independent, and they should be
most scrupulous in seeing that it is so.
v)
The identification parade must be held at the earliest opportunity and all
available witness should be required to attend at the very first parade.
vi)
Proper practice in England is that the parade should be arranged by the officer
in duty in charge of the station and not by the officer in charge of the
investigation.
vii)
The witness must not be allowed to see the accused until the moment when
everything is ready and they walk in to pick him out, and they should not have
been previously assisted by photographs or by any verbal or written
descriptions.
viii)
The witnesses should brought in one by one, and are usually directed to touch
the person they identify. Each witness having succeeded or failed, as the case
maybe, should be taken out by a different door and kept apart from the witness
who are to come.
ix)
When summing up in a case involving dispute identity, the judge must warn
the jury of the special need for caution before convicting the accused in
reliance of the correctness of the identification. He should instruct the jury as
to the reason for the need for such a warning and should make reference to the
possibility that a mistaken witness can be a convincing one.
b)
The judge should direct the jury to examine closely the circumstances in
which the identification by each witness came to be made. He should remind
the jury of any specific weaknesses which has appeared in the identification
evidence.
c)
The judge should leave the identification evidence to the jury only when the
quality of such evidence is good.
d)
When the quality of identifying is poor, the judge should withdraw the case
from the jury and direct an acquittal unless there is other evidence which goes
to support the correctness the identification.
e)
The judge should identify the jury the evidence which he adjudges is capable
of supporting the evidence of identification.
f)
Care should be taken by the judge when directing the jury about the support
for the identification which may be derived from the fact that they had rejected
the alibi.
13. Bolehkah pengecaman seseorang saksi yang telah melihat suspek sebelum
perbarisan cam (selain masa kejadian) diterima oleh mahkamah?
As stated in the case of Dato Mokhtar Bin Hashim & Anor v PP, if the accused
is not a total stranger to the witness, i.e. he is someone known by the witness, the
identification parade is less important. If the accused is an unknown person, then the
conduct of identification parade becomes necessary. This is also stated in the Court of
Appeal case of Thenegaran A/L Murugan & Anor v PP, when all the witness knew
the accused persons prior to the attack, identification parade will be of less important,
than if the accused had been unknown persons whom the witnesses had to be identify.
Thus, it can be said that conducting identification parade becomes necessary if the
accused is never seen by the witness before or unknown to a witness.