R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224

Facts

  • The appellant, Turnbull, was convicted largely on the basis of eyewitness identification evidence.
  • Prior to this case, several miscarriages of justice occurred due to reliance on mistaken eyewitness accounts.
  • Concerns had arisen about the reliability of visual identification, leading to judicial scrutiny and the commissioning of the Devlin Report.
  • R v Turnbull was heard by the Court of Appeal to address these concerns and to formalize judicial procedures surrounding identification evidence.

Issues

  1. Whether identification evidence can be relied upon for conviction in circumstances where it forms the primary or sole evidence against the accused.
  2. What judicial directions are necessary to guide juries in evaluating eyewitness identification evidence.
  3. Whether and under what circumstances expert evidence on the reliability of eyewitness testimony should be admitted.
  4. How juries should assess the quality and quantity of identification evidence in the context of criminal trials.

Decision

  • The Court established formal guidelines requiring trial judges to direct juries on the unique risks of eyewitness identification evidence.
  • Judges must caution juries on the possibility of honest but mistaken identifications and explain the reasons for this warning.
  • The jury must be guided to scrutinize the circumstances of identification, including factors such as distance, lighting, and observation duration.
  • Where identification evidence is weak or uncertain, judges are required to highlight these weaknesses to the jury.
  • The Court indicated that the qualitative value of identification evidence must be prioritized over the mere number of identifications.
  • Courts generally remain reluctant to routinely admit expert testimony on eyewitness reliability, emphasizing the sufficiency of proper judicial directions.

Legal Principles

  • Judicial directions must highlight the natural risks in eyewitness identification and advise special caution.
  • The quality, not just the quantity, of identification evidence is critical, as multiple mistaken identifications may occur.
  • Even convincingly given eyewitness evidence may be unreliable and should be critically assessed based on contextual factors.
  • The jury remains the proper body to assess reliability, with expert evidence on eyewitness identification typically excluded except in limited contexts.
  • The Turnbull guidelines provide a mandatory framework for directing juries in cases dependent on visual identification.

Conclusion

R v Turnbull established essential judicial guidelines for managing and evaluating eyewitness identification evidence to mitigate the risk of wrongful convictions, mandating clear jury instructions about the reliability and assessment of such evidence. The judgment remains a key authority for proper judicial practice in cases reliant on visual identification in criminal trials.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal