R. v. Crossley

R. v. Crossley

Dismissal: The videotaped photopack evidence was inadmissible because the witness did not make a positive or provably accurate prior identification and the officer permitted handling and comparison of photos contrary to recommended procedures, producing significant risk of prejudice with little probative value.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2005 BCSC 985
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Curtis James Crossley
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal: Second Degree Murder and Aggravated Assault / Mid Trial Voir Dire Ruling (application to Adduce Videotaped Photopack Identification)
Outcome
Crown application to admit videotaped photopack identification evidence dismissed
Legal Topics
Prior Identification, Videotaped Photopack/line Up, Best Evidence, Sophonow Inquiry Procedures, Prejudicial Vs Probative Assessment
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Identification Evidence Admissibility Prior Identification Videotaped Photopack/line Up Best Evidence Sophonow Inquiry Procedures +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Curtis James Crossley

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal: Second Degree Murder and Aggravated Assault / Mid Trial Voir Dire Ruling (application to Adduce Videotaped Photopack Identification)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a videotaped photopack showing a witness's participation can be admitted as prior identification evidence when the witness does not positively identify the accused at trial
  2. 2 Whether a witness's inability to identify at trial precludes admissibility of prior identification absent testimony that the earlier identification was accurate
  3. 3 Whether police procedure (allowing handling and comparison of photos) tainted the identification process such that admissibility is barred

Ratio Decidendi

Dismissal: The videotaped photopack evidence was inadmissible because the witness did not make a positive or provably accurate prior identification and the officer permitted handling and comparison of photos contrary to recommended procedures, producing significant risk of prejudice with little probative value.

Court Disposition

Crown application to admit videotaped photopack identification evidence dismissed

Orders

  • Crown's application dismissed
  • Videotaped photopack identification evidence excluded from jury consideration as identification evidence