Law_of_Evidence_in_Kenya

Opinion is usually admissible whether identity took place before the crime, at the identity parade
or at trial.
The general rule is that it is unsafe to convict on the evidence of identity of a suspect of one
witness without corroboration although it can be done. Such evidence should be received with a
lot of caution. In Rovia v R 85 Lord Gardner L.C stated “there may be a case in which identity is
in question and if any innocent people are convicted today I should think in nine cases out of
them if there are as many as ten it is a question of identity. It is the duty of the court especially
where the only evidence against an accused is identity by one witness, to satisfy itself that in all
circumstances it is safe to act on such identity”.
Admissibility of non-expert opinion evidence of identity
There are certain classes of cases where opinions of ordinary witnesses are not only helpful but
they have to be admitted out of necessity. There are things or events in which no language can
adequately describe and the best account is from the impression/opinion which the witnesses
formed.
Identity parades require special magistrates owing to the procedure and potential. In R v
Mwango s/o Manaa 86 only 3 men including the accused were paraded. The court held the
method of identification is very unsatisfactory.
85 (1967) EA 583,584 (CA)
86 (1936) 3 EACA 29