Judgment No. 25122 of 2023: Photographic Identification and Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Law

The recent judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 25122 of 07/03/2023 offers important insights into the use of evidence in criminal proceedings, particularly regarding photographic identification. The central issue is whether such evidence can be used in the absence of an in-court personal identification, opening a fundamental debate on the methods of identifying defendants.

Context of the Judgment

The case involved the defendant M. Z. and revolved around the validity of photographic identification carried out during preliminary investigations. The Court established that, even without an in-court personal identification, the identification of the subject can still be considered valid if supported by objective and consistent statements.

• Photographic evidence can substitute direct identification.
• The presence of objective data corroborating the testimony is crucial.
• The time elapsed since the event can affect the witness's memory but does not preclude the validity of the evidence.

Photographic identification carried out during preliminary investigations - Lack of in-court identification - Admissibility of photographic identification and its suitability to form the basis for a finding of guilt - Existence - Conditions - Factual scenario. In matters of evidence not regulated by law, where the photographic identification made during preliminary investigations is not followed, during the trial phase, by personal identification of the defendant present with "absolute certainty," proof of the identification of the aforementioned can also be reached by evaluating the previous confirmatory statement of the photographic identification, verifying the existence of objective data, possibly also reported by the witness, which explain the lack of recollection in terms of sure consistency. (Factual scenario in which the Court deemed correct the conviction issued in light of the failure of an eyewitness to recognize the defendant, who had justified the fading of the recollection concerning the person due to the time elapsed since the events, but who, at the same time, had recognized the vehicle used for the escape by the robbers, a circumstance that found "aliunde" extrinsic corroboration).

Implications of the Judgment

The decision of the Court of Cassation highlights the flexibility of evidentiary rules in Italy, allowing photographic identification to be used as valid evidence even in the absence of a strong link between the witness and the defendant. This judgment aligns with the principles of a Fair Trial, enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, which aims to ensure a balance between the needs of justice and the rights of the defendant.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 25122 of 2023 represents an important milestone in Italian jurisprudence concerning evidence in criminal proceedings. It clarifies that, while in-court personal identification is preferable, its absence does not necessarily invalidate other forms of identification, such as photographic identification. The implications of this decision could influence future cases and legal practice in Italy, making a thorough understanding of these regulatory developments essential for lawyers and legal professionals.