R vs Lucas Case Summary
Facts:
- Lucas was accused of perjury for falsely denying car ownership.
The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony to identify Lucas.
- Lucas claimed mistaken identity.
Issues:
1. Reliability of eyewitness identification evidence.
2. Judicial warnings to the jury regarding eyewitness testimony.
Held:
1. Eyewitness identification evidence is admissible but requires caution.
2. Judicial warning to the jury is necessary to emphasize potential unreliability.
Guidelines:
1. Judicial warning to the jury about eyewitness evidence limitations.
2. Corroboration of eyewitness evidence preferred.
3. Caution when relying solely on eyewitness testimony.
Rationale:
- Eyewitness evidence is potentially unreliable due to human error.
- Judicial warning ensures jury aware of limitations.
Impact:
- Established guidelines for eyewitness identification evidence in UK.
- Influenced the development of eyewitness evidence law in commonwealth jurisdictions.
Key Points:
1. Eyewitness identification evidence requires caution.
2. Judicial warning to jury necessary.
3. Corroboration preferred.
~ Mahir Sundaram Singh
Comments