{
  "url": "https://openlegislation.uk/police-and-criminal-evidence-act-1984-codes-of-practice-temporary-modifications-to-code-d-order-2002/schedule/paragraph-1",
  "json_url": "https://openlegislation.uk/police-and-criminal-evidence-act-1984-codes-of-practice-temporary-modifications-to-code-d-order-2002/schedule/paragraph-1.json",
  "legislation": "uksi/2002/615",
  "legislation_title": "The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (Codes of Practice) (Temporary Modifications to Code D) Order 2002",
  "legislation_url": "https://openlegislation.uk/police-and-criminal-evidence-act-1984-codes-of-practice-temporary-modifications-to-code-d-order-2002",
  "path": "schedule/paragraph/1",
  "kind": "paragraph",
  "number": "1",
  "heading": null,
  "text": "Replace paragraph 2 with the following:\n“Identification by witnesses\n2\nIntroduction\n2.1 Identification by witnesses arises, for example, if the offender is seen committing the crime and a witness is given an opportunity to identify the suspect in a video identification, identification parade, or similar procedure. The procedures are designed to test the ability of the witness to identify the person they saw on a previous occasion and to provide safeguards against mistaken identification. Persons other than police officers, including “approved persons” (see paragraph 2.13), who are charged with the duty of investigating offences or charging offenders must, in the discharge of that duty, have regard to any relevant provision of this and any other Code.\nIdentification by witnesses\n2.2 A record shall be made of the description of the suspect as first given by a potential witness. This must be done before the witness takes part in the forms of identification under paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11 of this Code. The record may be made or kept in any form provided that details of the description as first given by the witness can accurately be produced from it in a written form which can be provided to the suspect or the suspect’s solicitor in accordance with this Code. A copy shall be provided to the suspect or the suspect’s solicitor before any procedures under paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11 of this Code are carried out [see Note 2E].\n(a) Cases where the suspect is known and available\n2.3 In a case which involves disputed identification evidence, and where the identity of the suspect is known to the police and he is available, (see paragraph 2.12) the following identification procedures may be used:\nVideo identification\n2.4 A video identification is where the witness is shown images of a known suspect together with images of other people who resemble the suspect.\n2.5 Video identifications must be carried out in accordance with Annex A.\nIdentification parade\n2.6 An identification parade is where the witness sees the suspect in a line of other people who resemble the suspect.\n2.7 Identification parades must be carried out in accordance with Annex B.\nGroup identification\n2.8 A group identification is where the witness sees the suspect in an informal group of people.\n2.9 Group identifications must be carried out in accordance with Annex C.\nConfrontation\n2.10 A confrontation is where the suspect is directly confronted by the witness. This procedure may be used when it is not possible to arrange a video identification, identification parade, or group identification.\n2.11 Confrontations must be carried out in accordance with Annex D.\n2.12 References in this section to a suspect being “known” means there is sufficient information known to the police to justify the arrest of a particular person for suspected involvement in the offence. A suspect being “available” means that they are immediately available to take part in the procedure or will become available within a reasonably short time. A known suspect who fails or refuses to take part in any identification procedure which it is practicable to arrange, or takes steps to prevent themselves from being seen by a witness in such a procedure, may be treated as not being available for the purposes of this section.\nArranging identification procedures\n2.13 Except as provided for in paragraph 2.23 below, the arrangements for, and conduct of these types of identification procedures shall be the responsibility of an officer not below the rank of inspector who is not involved with the investigation (“the identification officer”) other than for the purposes of these procedures. Unless otherwise specified, the identification officer may allow an “approved person” to make arrangements for, and to conduct any of the identification procedures in paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11. Approved persons are engaged to carry out specified duties or procedures as allowed under this Code and:\n(i) appointed by the Chief Officer of any police force and under the control and direction of that Chief Officer; and\n(ii) employed by the police authority maintaining that force.\nNo officer or any other person involved with the investigation of the case against the suspect beyond the extent required by these procedures may take any part in these procedures or act as the identification officer. This does not prevent the identification officer from consulting the officer in charge of the investigation in order to determine which procedure to use.\nCircumstances in which an identification procedure must be held\n2.14 Whenever a suspect disputes an identification made or purported to have been made by a witness, an identification procedure shall be held if practicable unless paragraph 2.15 applies. Such a procedure may also be held if the officer in charge of the investigation considers that it would be useful. When an identification procedure is required to be held, in the interests of fairness to suspects and witnesses, it must be held as soon as practicable.\n2.15 An identification procedure need not be held if, in all the circumstances, it would serve no useful purpose in proving or disproving whether the suspect was involved in committing the offence. Examples would be where it is not in dispute that the suspect is already well known to the witness who saw the suspect commit the crime or where there is no reasonable possibility that a witness would be able to make an identification.\nSelecting an identification procedure\n2.16 If, as a consequence of paragraph 2.14, it is proposed to hold an identification procedure, the suspect shall initially be offered either a video identification or an identification parade unless paragraph 2.18 applies. The officer in charge of the case may choose freely between these two options to decide which is to be offered. The identification officer and the officer in charge of the investigation shall consult each other to determine which of these two options is the most suitable and practicable in the particular case. An identification parade may not be practicable because of factors relating to the witnesses such as their number, state of health, availability and travelling requirements. A video identification would normally be more suitable if, in a particular case, it could be arranged and completed sooner than an identification parade (see paragraph 2.14).\n2.17 A suspect who refuses the identification procedure which is first offered shall be asked to state their reason for refusing and may obtain advice from their solicitor and appropriate adult if present. The suspect, solicitor and appropriate adult shall be allowed to make representations as to why another procedure should be used. A record shall be made of the reasons for the suspect’s refusal and of any representations made. After considering any reasons given and representations made the identification officer shall, if appropriate, arrange for the suspect to be offered an alternative which the officer considers is suitable and practicable in that particular case. If the officer decides that it is not suitable and practicable to offer an alternative identification procedure, the reasons for that decision shall be recorded.\n2.18 A group identification may initially be offered where the officer in charge of the investigation considers that in the particular circumstances it is more satisfactory than a video identification or an identification parade and the identification officer considers it is practicable to arrange.\n2.19 If the suspect refuses or fails to take part in a video identification, an identification parade or a group identification, or refuses or fails to take part in the only practicable options from that list, the identification officer has discretion to make arrangements for a covert video identification or a covert group identification. In making arrangements for a covert video identification or other arrangements to test the ability of the witness to identify the person they saw on a previous occasion, the identification officer has discretion to use any suitable images of the suspect, whether moving or still, which are available or can be obtained.\n2.20 If none of the options referred to above are practicable, the identification officer may arrange for the suspect to be confronted by the witness. A confrontation does not require the suspect’s consent.\nNotice to suspect\n2.21 Unless paragraph 2.24 applies, before a video identification, an identification parade or group identification is arranged the following shall be explained to the suspect:\n(i) the purposes of the video identification or identification parade or group identification;\n(ii) the suspect’s entitlement to free legal advice;\n(iii) the procedures for holding it (including the suspect’s right to have a solicitor or friend present);\n(iv) that the suspect does not have to take part in a video identification, identification parade or group identification;\n(v) whether, for the purposes of the video identification procedure, images of the suspect have previously been obtained (see paragraph 2.24) and if so, that they may co-operate in providing further suitable images which shall be used in place of those previously taken;\n(vi) where appropriate the special arrangements for juveniles;\n(vii) where appropriate the special arrangements for mentally disordered or otherwise mentally vulnerable people;\n(viii) that if the suspect does not consent to, and take part in, a video identification, identification parade or group identification, their refusal may be given in evidence in any subsequent trial and police may proceed covertly without their consent or make other arrangements to test whether a witness can identify them (see paragraph 2.19);\n(ix) that if the suspect should significantly alter their appearance between being offered an identification procedure and any attempt to hold an identification procedure, this may be given in evidence if the case comes to trial, and the identification officer may then consider other forms of identification [see paragraph 2.19 and Note 2C];\n(x) that a video or photograph may be taken of the suspect when they attend for any identification procedure;\n(xi) whether the witness has been shown photographs, a computerised or artist’s composite likeness or similar likeness or picture by the police during the investigation before the identity of the suspect became known [see Note 2B];\n(xii) that if the suspect changes their appearance before a identification parade it may not be practicable to arrange one on the day in question or subsequently and, because of the change of appearance, the identification officer may then consider alternative methods of identification [see Note 2C];\n(xiii) that the suspect or their solicitor will be provided with details of the description of the suspect as first given by any witnesses who are to attend the video identification, identification parade, group identification or confrontation.\n2.22 This information must also be contained in a written notice which must be handed to the suspect. The suspect must be given a reasonable opportunity to read the notice, after which they shall be asked to sign a second copy of the notice to indicate whether or not they are willing to co-operate with the making of a video or take part in the identification parade or group identification. The signed copy shall be retained by the identification officer.\n2.23 The duties of the identification officer under paragraphs 2.21 and 2.22 may be performed by the custody officer or any other officer not involved in the investigation of the case against the suspect if:\n(a) it is proposed to hold an identification procedure at a later date (for example if the suspect is to be bailed to attend an identification parade); and\n(b) an inspector is not available to act as the identification officer (see paragraph 2.13) before the suspect leaves the station where they are detained.\nThe officer concerned shall inform the identification officer of the action taken and give them the signed copy of the notice [see Note 2C].\n2.24 If the identification officer and the officer in charge of the investigation have reasonable grounds to suspect that if the suspect was given the information and notice in accordance with paragraphs 2.21 and 2.22, they would thereafter take steps to avoid being seen by a witness in any identification procedure which it would otherwise be practicable to arrange, the identification officer has discretion to arrange for images of the suspect to be obtained for use in a video identification procedure before the information and notice in paragraphs 2.21 and 2.22 is given. If images of the suspect are obtained in these circumstances, the suspect may, for the purposes of a video identification procedure, co-operate in providing suitable images which shall be used in place of those previously taken (see paragraph 2.21(v)).\n(b) Cases where the suspect is known but is not available\n2.25 Where a known suspect is not available or has ceased to be available for any reason (see paragraph 2.12), the identification officer has discretion to make arrangements for a video identification to be conducted. This must be done in accordance with the provisions applicable to covert video identification (see paragraph 2.19 and Annex A). However, any requirements of this section and Annex A for information in any form to be given to or sought from a suspect or for the suspect to be given an opportunity to view images before they are shown to a witness shall not apply if, at the time the requirement arises, the suspect is not available. For each such requirement, the record of the video identification shall indicate the reason why the suspect was not available [see paragraph 2.31 and Note 2D].\n(c) Cases where the identity of the suspect is not known\n2.26 A witness may be taken to a particular neighbourhood or place to see whether they can identify the person whom they saw on the relevant occasion. Although the number, age, sex, race and general description and style of clothing of other people present at the location and the way in which any identification is made cannot be controlled, the principles applicable to the formal procedures under paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11 shall be followed so far as is practicable in the circumstances. For example:\n(a) Before asking the witness to make an identification, where practicable, a record shall be made of any description given by the witness of the suspect.\n(b) Care should be taken not to direct the witness’s attention to any individual unless, having regard to all the circumstances, this cannot be avoided. However, this does not prevent a witness being asked to look carefully at the people who are around at the time or to look towards a group or in a particular direction if this appears to be necessary to ensure that the witness does not overlook a possible suspect simply because the witness is looking in the opposite direction and also to enable the witness to make comparisons between any suspect and others who are in the area at the time [see Note 2F].\n(c) Where there is more than one witness, every effort should be made to keep them separate and where practicable, witnesses should be taken to see whether they can identify a person independently.\n(d) Once there is sufficient information to justify the arrest of a particular individual for suspected involvement in the offence, for example after a witness makes a positive identification, formal identification procedures must be adopted for any other witnesses in relation to that individual.\n(e) The officer or approved person accompanying the witness shall make a record in their pocket book of the action taken as soon as practicable and in as much detail as possible. The record should include: the date, time and place of the relevant occasion the witness claims to have previously seen the suspect; where any identification was made; how it was made and the conditions at the time (for example, the distance the witness was from the suspect, the weather and light); if the witness’s attention was drawn to the suspect; the reason for this; and anything said by the witness or the suspect about the identification or the conduct of the procedure.\n2.27 A witness must not be shown photographs, computerised or artist’s composite likenesses or similar likenesses or pictures if the identity of the suspect is known to the police and the suspect is available to take part in a video identification, an identification parade or a group identification. If the identity of the suspect is not known, the showing of such pictures to a witness must be done in accordance with Annex E (see paragraphs 2.12, 2.21(xi) and 2.25).\n(d) Documentation\n2.28 A record shall be made of the video identification, identification parade, group identification or confrontation on forms provided for the purpose.\n2.29 If the identification officer considers that it is not practicable to hold a video identification or identification parade when either are requested by the suspect, the reasons shall be recorded and explained to the suspect.\n2.30 A record shall be made of a person’s failure or refusal to co-operate in a video identification, identification parade or group identification and, if applicable, of the grounds for obtaining images in accordance with paragraph 2.24.\n(e) Showing films and photographs of incidents and information released to the media\n2.31 Nothing in this Code inhibits the showing of videos or photographs to the public at large through the national or local media, or to police officers for the purposes of recognition and tracing suspects. However, when such material is shown to potential witnesses (including police officers) [see Note 2A] for the purpose of obtaining identification evidence, it shall be shown on an individual basis so as to avoid any possibility of collusion, and the showing shall, as far as possible, follow the principles for video identification if the suspect is known (see paragraphs 2.12, 2.23 and Annex A) or identification by photographs if the suspect is not known (see paragraphs 2.12, 2.27 and Annex E) as appropriate.\n2.32 Where a broadcast or publication is made, as in paragraph 2.31, a copy of the relevant material released by the police to the media for the purposes of recognising or tracing the suspect shall be kept and the suspect or their solicitor shall be allowed to view such material before any procedures under paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11 of this Code are carried out (see paragraph 2.12 and Note 2E) provided it is practicable to do so and would not unreasonably delay the investigation. Each witness who is involved in the procedure shall be asked after they have taken part whether they have seen any broadcast or published films or photographs relating to the offence or seen any description of any person suspected of the offence and their replies shall be recorded. This paragraph does not affect any separate requirement under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 to retain material in connection with criminal investigations.\n(f) Destruction and retention of photographs and images taken or used in identification procedures\n2.33 Section 64A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 provides powers to take photographs and images of suspects detained at police stations and allows the photographs and images so taken to be used or disclosed only for purposes related to the prevention or detection of crime, the investigation of offences or the conduct of prosecutions by or on behalf of police or other law enforcement and prosecuting authorities inside and outside the United Kingdom. After being so used or disclosed, they may be retained but must not be used or disclosed except for these purposes. Section 64A, therefore, allows photographs and images of suspects detained at police stations to be taken and used for the purposes of the identification procedures in paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11.\n2.34 Subject to paragraph 2.36 the photographs and images (and the negatives and all copies thereof) of suspects who have not been detained which are taken for the purposes of, or in connection with, the identification procedures in paragraphs 2.3 to 2.11 must be destroyed unless the suspect:\n(a) is charged with, or informed they may be prosecuted for, a recordable offence;\n(b) is prosecuted for a recordable offence;\n(c) is cautioned for a recordable offence or given a warning or reprimand in accordance with the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 for a recordable offence; or\n(d) gives informed consent in writing for the photograph or image to be retained for purposes described in paragraph 2.33.\n2.35 When paragraph 2.34 requires the destruction of any photograph or image the person must be given an opportunity to witness the destruction or to have a certificate confirming the destruction provided that they so request within five days of being informed that the destruction is required.\n2.36 Nothing in paragraph 2.34 affects any separate requirement under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 to retain material in connection with criminal investigations.\nNotes for Guidance\n2A Except for the provisions of Annex E paragraph 1, a police officer who is a witness for the purposes of this part of the Code is subject to the same principles and procedures as a civilian witness.\n2B Where a witness attending an identification parade has previously been shown photographs, computerised or artist’s composite likenesses, or similar likenesses or pictures, it is the responsibility of the officer in charge of the investigation to make the identification officer aware that this is the case.\n2C The purpose of paragraph 2.23 is to avoid or reduce delay in arranging identification procedures by enabling the required information and warnings (see sub-paragraphs 2.21(ix) and 2.21(xii)) to be given at the earliest opportunity.\n2D Paragraph 2.25 would apply where a known suspect deliberately makes him or herself “unavailable” in order to delay or frustrate arrangements being made for obtaining identification evidence. It enables any suitable images of the suspect (moving or still) which are available or can be obtained to be used in a video identification.\n2E Where it is proposed to show photographs to a witness in accordance with Annex E it is the responsibility of the officer in charge of the investigation to confirm to the officer responsible for supervising and directing the showing that the first description of the suspect given by that witness has been recorded. If this description has not been recorded, the procedure under Annex E must be postponed. (See Annex E paragraph 2).\n2F The admissibility and value of identification evidence obtained when carrying out the procedure under paragraph 2.26 may be compromised if:\n(a) before a person is identified, the witness’s attention is specifically drawn to that person; or\n(b) the identity of the suspect has become known before the procedure takes place.”.",
  "extent": null,
  "status": null,
  "version": "current",
  "annotations": [],
  "outstanding_effects": [],
  "provenance": {
    "source": "legislation.gov.uk",
    "source_url": "https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/615/schedule/paragraph/1",
    "retrieved_at": "2026-10-29T07:11:53.024501+00:00"
  },
  "licence": "Open Government Licence v3.0",
  "licence_url": "https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/",
  "attribution": "Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: legislation.gov.uk, The National Archives."
}