Crampton, R. v

Crampton, R. v

The judge was entitled to admit the Facebook identification evidence despite breach of Code D, as there was sufficient supporting identification evidence and the issue was one of weight for the jury; the conviction was safe and the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Mark Anthony Crampton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Breach of Code D, Section 78 PACE, Facebook Identification, VIPER Procedure
Criminal Law Identification Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Breach of Code D Section 78 PACE Facebook Identification VIPER Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Mark Anthony Crampton

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Facebook identification evidence should be excluded due to breach of Code D of PACE
  2. 2 Whether failure to conduct a formal identification procedure prejudiced the appellant
  3. 3 Whether the conviction was safe given the identification evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to admit the Facebook identification evidence despite breach of Code D, as there was sufficient supporting identification evidence and the issue was one of weight for the jury; the conviction was safe and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed