Application for discharge — grievous bodily harm with intent — aggravated robbery — reliability of identification evidence — R v Flyger [2001] 2 NZLR 71 — Parris v Attorney-General [2004] 1 NZLR 519 — R v Turnbull [1977] 1 Q.V. 224 — Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 147(4)(c). The defendant faced charges of grievous bodily harm with intent and aggravated robbery. He applied under s 147(4)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act to have the charges dismissed on the grounds that no properly-directed jury could convict him. The defendant argued that the evidence of the complainant identifying him as the attacker was of extremely poor quality: it was only a fleeting glimpse, the complainant could not say what the defendant was wearing, and the complainant and the defendant did not know one another well. The Crown opposed the application, arguing that the complainant and defendant had known each other for 15 to 20 years and were members of the same gang. Further the attack had occurred in broad daylight, thus strengthening the reliability of the identification. The Court found that the complainant and the defendant did indeed know each other well. The complainant had an unobstructed view of the defendant just before the attack, and also recognised his voice. Therefore a properly-directed jury would be able to convict the defendant. The application was dismissed. Judgment Date: 19 March 2018.