Admissibility of visual identification evidence — aggravated robbery — Evidence Act 2006, s 45 — Faifua & Hepburn v R [2011] NZCA 152. The defendant sought to have visual identification evidence, a photo from an identification montage, ruled inadmissible, pursuant to s 45 of the Evidence Act 2006. The defendant faced charges relating to an aggravated robbery and when the complainant was brought in to make an identification from a photo montage, the photo used was five years old and showed the defendant with short hair and little facial hair. The defendant, at the time of the alleged offending, had longer hair and more facial hair. The complainant still made the identification. The Judge held that what is required is consistency between the image of the person being identified and the other images, which the defence conceded was the case in this instance. The fact the defence argued it was an old image did not prove on the balance of probabilities that the evidence was unreliable, therefore the evidence was admissible. Judgment Date: 4 May 2018.