Pretrial — admissibility of evidence — identification evidence — reserved decision — assault — injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm — gang fight — Evidence Act 2006, s 25 — R v Ruawhare and ors [2022] NZDC 7694 — Keil v Police [2017] NZCA 430. Fifteen defendants were facing charges of assault and injuring with intent to injure. The charges arose from a fight between rival gang members outside a court house. The prosecution sought to introduce as evidence a statement from a Detective (the witness) that identified three of the defendants as having participated in the incident. The witness was part of a taskforce that specialised in gangs, and as part of this work he had viewed photographs of the defendants and had also researched their social media profiles. However he had only had one direct interaction with each of the three defendants. The Court considered that the witness' interactions with the defendants was limited and unremarkable. The witness had no particular expertise in identifying members of the defendants' gang. The descriptions of the defendants that the witness had provided were not particularly detailed. Members of the jury would be capable of viewing footage of the incident themselves to determine whether or not the defendants had been involved. The Court therefore concluded that the witness' evidence was not relevant and was inadmissible. In a related matter, the Court ruled that the prosecution could play footage of the incident with red arrow graphics included, but that it could not include in the footage labels showing the defendants' names. Judgment Date: 17 May 2022.