The accused brought a pre-trial motion seeking to exclude eyewitness identification evidence from the victim of an armed robbery.
The defence argued the identification was unreliable due to flaws in a photo array lineup and a subsequent inconsistent identification in a later sequential lineup.
The court held that although the initial lineup had imperfections, those issues affected the weight of the evidence rather than its admissibility.
The judge concluded that the witness had a meaningful opportunity to observe the perpetrator and that any reliability concerns could be addressed through cross-examination and careful jury instructions.
