header-logo header-logo

30 November 2012 / Noël Sweeney
Issue: 7540 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

Biting back

Noël Sweeney identifies the complexities of identifying dogs

Identification evidence is the weakest form of evidence that exists. As a result of R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224, [1976] 3 All ER 549, a judge has a duty to warn a jury of the dangers of relying on identification. The dangers apply equally to civil and criminal cases. However, it is neither fair nor just to limit the protection of the law to a human. The dangers in identifying animals, be it a poodle or a pit bull, are akin to those of identifying humans rather than inanimate objects. There is no reason why a court should not apply Turnbull to animals and every reason why it should do so. For if a man is wrongly identified it can be corrected on appeal as a miscarriage of justice. If a dog is wrongly identified, no appeal could reverse destiny if his sentence is death.

Primary legislation

Although the primary legislation concerned with dangerous dogs is the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (DDA 1991), the Dogs Act

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
back-to-top-scroll