R v Peato

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the appellant Iona Peato successfully appealed against his conviction on two counts: injuring with intent to injure and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The convictions were quashed and a retrial was ordered. The Court held that the trial judge failed to give an adequate direction on identification as required by section 126 of the Evidence Act 2006, and also failed to clearly identify the issues and the prosecution and defence cases in relation to each issue. The summing up did not adequately put the defence case, and there were concerns about the way in which the judge dealt with the burden and onus of proof. The Court concluded that these errors led to a miscarriage of justice. The Court also commented on the limited probative value and potential prejudicial effect of dock identifications, and the importance of following proper identification procedures.