Recent Judicial Decisions
| Author | Damian Carney |
| Date | 01 September 2013 |
| Published date | 01 September 2013 |
| DOI | 10.1350/pojo.2013.86.3.637 |
| Subject Matter | Recent Judicial Decisions |
DAMIAN CARNEY
Legal Correspondent
Email: Damian.Carney@port.ac.uk
RECENT JUDICIAL DECISIONS
CCTV identification of suspect in breach of PACE
Regina v Frederick Selwyn{2012} EWCA Crim 2968
Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Gross LJ, Macduff J and Elgan Edwards J
14 December 2012
On 26 June 2012, the appellant was convicted by a majority
verdict at Wood Green Crown Court of violent disorder. He
was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. The appellant
appealed to the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division.
Keywords: police identification of suspect; CCTV; Code D
of Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984; paras 3.34-3.37;
The facts
During early August 2011 there were major riots throughout
London and elsewhere in the United Kingdom. This included
events on 9 August 2011 in the area of Prince Regents Lane of
East London. The police’s air support unit had taken surveillance
videos of these incidents, and the appellant was identified from
these videos by a PCSO who claimed to have personal know-
ledge of the appellant and recognised him by his clothing
(Adidas clothing) and three distinctive facial features (slim build,
slim face and pointed nose). The PCSO made a contemporan-
eous note of the identification in the presence of another PCSO
whose presence was not explained, contrary to para. 3.36(d)
Code D of PACE.
The law
Paras 3.34–3.37 of Code D of Police and Criminal Evidence Act
1984 apply to any police identification of a suspect from video or
photographs. Para. 3.35 requires ‘images shall be shown on an
individual basis to avoid any possibility of collusion and to
provide safeguards against mistaken recognition’ and para.
276 The Police Journal, Volume 86 (2013)
DOI: 10.1350/pojo.2013.86.3.637
To continue reading
Request your trial