Marcus, R. v
The use of unmasked images in the video identification procedure was a deliberate and unfair violation of Code D, rendering the convictions on counts dependent on that evidence unsafe. The judge should have excluded the evidence. The convictions on counts 8 and 10, supported by independent evidence, remain safe and are not contaminated by the flawed procedure.
- Parties
- Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Ruel Marcus
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 November 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Robbery, False Imprisonment, Identification Evidence, Police and Criminal Evidence Act, Code D Compliance
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Respondent
Ruel Marcus
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the video identification procedure violated Code D of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
- 2 Whether the convictions based on the impugned identification evidence were unsafe
- 3 Whether procedural defects contaminated other convictions
Ratio Decidendi
The use of unmasked images in the video identification procedure was a deliberate and unfair violation of Code D, rendering the convictions on counts dependent on that evidence unsafe. The judge should have excluded the evidence. The convictions on counts 8 and 10, supported by independent evidence, remain safe and are not contaminated by the flawed procedure.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part
Orders
- Convictions on counts 4, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 quashed
- Convictions on counts 8 and 10 upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment