Identification Parade And Its Usefulness In The Criminal Justice System

BY Oyetola Muyiwa Atoyebi, SAN

INTRODUCTION

In criminal cases, the crucial issue is usually not whether an offence has been committed or not. Usually, controversy rages over the identification of the person or persons accused as the actual perpetrators of the offence charged.[1] It is possible that a mass arrest has been made in connection to an offence committed and the victim of the crime is not able to pinpoint the suspect.[2] It is, therefore, now necessary that the victim or witness identifies who he thinks is responsible for the crime that has been committed.

Identification, in this context, means a whole series of facts and circumstances for which a witness or witnesses associates a suspect with the commission of the offences charged. It may include evidence in the form of fingerprints, handwriting, voice, identification parade, photograph identity, or the recollection of the features of the culprit by a witness who saw him in the act of the commission of a crime; or a combination of two or more of these.[3]

Evidence as to the identity of a suspect is relevant and admissible at all criminal trials.[4]

MEANING OF IDENTIFICATION PARADE

The Black’s Law Dictionary[5] defines Identification Parade as a police identification procedure in which physically similar persons, one of whom may be the suspect, are shown to the victim, usually simultaneously, or a witness to determine whether the suspect can be identified as the perpetrator of the crime.

A police lineup or identity parade is a process by which a crime victim or witness‘s putative identification of a suspect is confirmed to a level that can count as evidence at trial. The suspect, along with several “fillers” or “foils”—people of similar height, build, and complexion who may be prisoners, actors, police officers, or volunteers—stand side-by-side, both facing and in profile.[6]

An identification parade can also be referred to as a police lineup or identity lineup and they can be conducted in different ways, viz:

1. Conventional lineup: a lineup in which the witness can view all the victims simultaneously and look at each one repeatedly before identifying the culprit or declaring that no one in the lineup is the culprit.[7] This can also be called a simultaneous identification parade;
2. Blank lineup: a type of identification parade in which the witness is shown a lineup that contains only fillers, or people who are not suspects in the crime[8];
3. Sequential lineup: a lineup in which each person is shown separately to the witness, who must decide whether a person is the culprit before the next person is shown. Under this technique, the witness can compare a person only to the witness’s memory of the suspect’s appearance[9];
4. Double-blind sequential lineup: a lineup in which the law-enforcement Double-blind or officers conducting the procedure do not know which participant is the suspect[10].

WHEN IS IT NECESSARY TO CONDUCT AN IDENTIFICATION PARADE

Identification parade is not a “sine qua non” for identification in all cases where there has been a fleeting encounter with the victim of a crime, If there is other evidence leading conclusively to the identity of the perpetrators of the offence. An identification parade is only essential in the following situations:[11]

1. Where the victim did not know the accused before and his first acquaintance with him is during the commission of the offence;
2. Where the victim was confronted by the offender for a very short time; and
3. Where the victim, due to time and circumstance, might not have had the full opportunity of observing the features of the accused.

It is not in every case that an identification parade becomes necessary. The Supreme Court, in various decided cases has given instances where it may not be compulsory to conduct an identification parade, including:

1. Where the suspect confesses to the commission of the crime;
2. Where the offender is arrested in the act or process of committing the crime;[12]
3. Where the suspect was well known to the witness before the commission of the crime. In this instance, any lineup whatsoever will be for recognition;[13]
4. Where an alibi has been provided by the suspect and sufficiently proven[14]
5. Where there is other evidence leading conclusively to the identity of the perpetrators of the offence.[15]

PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING AN IDENTIFICATION PARADE

The identification of a suspected person must be very carefully conducted and it is very wrong to point out the suspected person and ask, ‘Is that the man?’ The usual and proper way is to place the suspected person with a sufficient number of others and to have the identifying witness pick out the accused without any assistance. It is highly improper to invite witnesses to identify the accused not mixed up with other people. A parade with only the accused on parade is definitely not an identification parade known to law.[16]

It is important to mention that none of our local rules of evidence makes provision for how an identification parade should be conducted. The rules of conducting same have been adopted from common law rules in England.[17] Some of these procedures include:[18]

1. Immediately before the procedure, the suspect must be reminded of the procedure and cautioned as appropriate.
2. All unauthorized persons must be excluded from the place where the identification is held.
3. Once the parade has begun, everything should be done to the hearing of the suspect and, if any, his interpreter.
4. The parade shall consist of at least eight people, in addition to the suspect, who resemble the suspect in age, height, general appearance, etc.
5. If the suspect has an unusual physical feature, like a facial scar, or tattoo, which cannot be replicated on other members of the parade, steps should be taken to conceal it.
6. Where there is more than one suspect, separate identification parades should be held for each of them, except if they are of the same build.
7. Suspect may select his own position in the line, but otherwise should not interfere with the order.
8. Where there is more than one witness, the suspect may, if he wishes, change his position in the lineup after each witness.
9. Each position in the lineup must be clearly numbered.
10. Witnesses are not to communicate with each other before the parade, or overhear another witness who has already seen the lineup.
11. Witnesses must not see the suspect before or after the identification parade.
12. The officer in charge of the parade must not communicate with the witness about the composition of the parade and whether another witness has made any identification.
13. When the last witness has left, the suspect shall be asked if he wishes to make any comments on the conduct of the identification parade.
14. A video recording should normally, be made of the identification proceedings. If not possible, colour photographs should be taken. A record of the conduct of the parade should be made on forms provided for that purpose.[19]

USEFULNESS OF CONDUCTING IDENTIFICATION PARADE IN CRIMINAL TRIALS

As the popular saying by William Blackstone goes, ‘in the pursuit of justice, it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent person suffers’.

Whenever a crime is committed, someone is responsible for the crime. Someone is also the victim of the crime.[20] However, when an innocent person is convicted wrongly, there is a new victim of the crime and this goes against the very essence of justice. The importance of identification evidence can not be overemphasized. It plays the following roles during the administration of criminal justice:

1. Tests the witness’ ability to identify the person he saw on a previous occasion;
2. Provide against mistaken identity[21]

CONCLUSION

The position of the law as regards identification evidence is clear, through a plethora of cases as mentioned above, that where there is any doubt at all as to the identity of a suspect or suspects, identification evidence must be given in order to avoid any case of mistaken identity.

SNIPPET

Whenever a crime is committed, someone is responsible for the crime. Someone is also the victim of the crime. However, when an innocent person is convicted wrongly, there is a new victim of the crime.

KEYWORDS

Identification; Parade; Lineup; Identification Parade

AUTHOR: Oyetola Muyiwa Atoyebi, SAN

Mr Oyetola Muyiwa Atoyebi, SAN is the Managing Partner of O. M. Atoyebi, S.A.N & Partners (OMAPLEX Law Firm).

Mr. Atoyebi has expertise in and vast knowledge of Criminal Law Practice and this has seen him advise and represent his vast clientele in a myriad of high-level transactions.  He holds the honour of being the youngest lawyer in Nigeria’s history to be conferred with the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

He can be reached at atoyebi@omaplex.com.ng

CONTRIBUTOR: Betseabasi Eyo

Betseabasi is a member of the Dispute Resolution Team at OMAPLEX Law Firm. She also holds commendable legal expertise in Criminal Law Practice.

She can be reached at betseabasi.eyo@omaplex.com.ng

[1] Ikemson v State [1989]3 NWLR 455 SC @478

[2] ibid

[3] Archibong v State [2006] 14 NWLR 349 SC @ 371

[4] Section 7(c) of the Evidence Act

[5] Garner, Black’s Law Dictionary, (Thomson Reuters, Tenth Edition) @1071

[6] Police Lineup; Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_lineup,  Accessed on 17/05/2023

[7] Garner, Black’s Law Dictionary, (Thomson Reuters, Tenth Edition) p. 1071

[8] Ibid

[9] Ibid

[10] ibid

[11] Ikemson V State (supra) @460

[12] Otti V state [1993] 5 SCNJ 143

[13] Samuel Bozin v State [1985] 2 NWLR 464 SC

[14] Abudu V State [1985] 1 NSCC 78

[15] Ikemson v State (supra)

[16] Samuel Bozin v State (Supra) @467

[17] Code of Practice for Identification of Persons by Police Officers (Code D), 2004

[18] J. A. Agaba, Practical Approach to Criminal Litigation in Nigeria (Renaissance Law Publishers Ltd, 2017) 3^rd Edition

[19] ibid

[20] Identification Parade under Nigerian Law by Barr. Ngwu Michael, Retrieved from https://courtsarena.com/identification-parade-under-nigerian-law/#:~:text=The%20sole%20purpose%20of%20Identification,the%20prosecutor%20during%20criminal%20trial. Accessed on 19/05/2023; 03:48 pm

[21] J. A. Agaba, Practical Approach to Criminal Litigation in Nigeria (Renaissance Law Publishers Ltd, 2017)3^rd Edition