Mr S was accused of burgling the store he had recently been deputy manager of but had left to take up a new job elsewhere. During the course of the burglary the store door was unlocked with a key, the alarm was deactivated with a code and the burglar seemed to know how to access the tills. There was grainy CCTV of the burglar. The area manager purported to identify Mr S by his gait (how he walks) and by the fact the burglar was taller than the other managers who would have had access to the store.
The defence obtained an expert on gait analysis who was able to analyse the footage and give evidence in general about the unreliability of identification by gait. The defence also sought disclosure from the CPS about the use of the alarm code – there was agreement that each employee had their own code.
The gait evidence that the defence obtained significantly undermined the prosecution case. It also transpired that the alarm code used was that of the area manager – not Mr S. The prosecution was forced to offer no evidence (drop the case) against Mr S and a verdict of Not Guilty was recorded on the Court record
Counsel William Paynter represented the accused.
