I
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1977
י
HE POINTED OUT THAT THE THREE OFFENCES MOST LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED ON THAT OCCASION WERE: TAKING PART IN AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY ASSAULT OF ONE DEGREE OR ANOTHER AND CRIMINAL DAMAGE.
HE SAID THE OFFENCE OF PARTICIPATING IN AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY INVOLVED MORE THAN MERE PRESENCE.
+ IT INVOLVES, AND EMPHASISE THE WORDS, TAKING PART' IN AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY.
MR. HOSLEY SAID THE CASE OF A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY PARTICIPATED ACTIVELY BY FIGHTING, THREATENING OR EVEN SHOUTING ENCOURAGEMENT PRESENTED NO DIFFICULTY AS HIS INTENTION TO ENCOURAGE THE FORMATION OR CONTINUANCE OF THE UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY WAS CLEAR,
BUT HE SAID THE CASE OF A PERSON WHO WAS MERELY PRESENT WITHOUT PARTICIPATING ACTIVELY WAS MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE ALTHOUGH HIS PRESENCE MAY IN FACT GAVE SOME ENCOURAGEMENT, THE CROWN HAD STILL TO ESTABLISH THAT HE WAS PRESENT WITH THE INTENTION OF ENCOURAGING THE FORMATION OR THE CONTINUANCE OF THE ASSEMBLY.
MR. HOBLEY POINTED OUT THAT ALTHOUGH THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS WERE ABLE TO PICK OUT FROM THE NUMEROUS AVAILABLE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EVENTS, A NUMBER OF PERSONS AS HAVING VARIOUS DEGRESS OF RESEMBLANCE TO KNOWN POLICE OFFICERS, THAT STANDARD OF IDENTIFICATION FELL SHORT OF BEING SUFFICIENT ON ITS OWN TO SUPPORT THE INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS.
HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE IDENTIFICATION OF A PERSON AS A PARTICIPANT IN CRIME MERELY FROM A PHOTOGRAPH OR FILM TAKEN AT THE SCENE WAS NOT ADEQUATE UNLESS THE IDENTIFICATION FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS CERTAIN AND THAT WAS NOT THE CASE HERE,+ HE ADDED.
MR. HOBLEY SAID THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS IN THIS INCIDENT DID NOT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE SORT OF INFORMATION WHICH WAS OFTEN AVAILABLE TO THEM IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CRIME. AND THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO FIND ANY POLICE OFFICER WHO WAS ABLE, OR WILLING, TO IDENTIFY ANY FELLOW OFFICER AS AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT.
+SO THE REPORT SUBMITTED TO ME BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS CONTAINED, SAVE IN ONE CASE, NO EVIDENCE AT ALL AS TO THE IDENTITY OF THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE EVENTS AND NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE EVEN AS TO WHO WAS PRESENT, MR. HOBLEY REMARKED.
IN THAT CASE, HE SAID, ONLY A PERSON WAS CONSIDERED TO BE SUFFICIENTLY IDENTIFIABLE AS AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE INVESTIGATORS TO WARRANT HIS BEING PUT ON AN IDENTIFICATION PARADE AS A SUSPECT.
+ THAT MAN APPEARS IN A NOW WELL-KNOWN PHOTOGRAPH PULLING THE TIE OF AN ICAC OFFICER.
*WHEN THIS SUSPECT WAS PUT ON AN IDENTIFICATION PARADE, HE WAS NOT IDENTIFIED BY ANY OF THE THREE ICAC OFFICERS WHO BELIEVED THAT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO RECOGNISE HIM AGAIN, HE SAID.