discrediting eyewitness evidence

The prosection cased hinged on the eyewitness identification of the defendant by Mr Stephens. Most viewers of the documentary seem to find that evidence unpersuasive, but until the verdict was announced, Patrick McGuinness was not confident of an acquittal. It seems the police never arranged an ID parade. I just wonder if in a situation like this, the defense has ever put the witness to the test in front of a jury - adopting the facts of this case, for example showing the witness a photo of a young black man for 4-5 seconds, then two or three hours later inviting the witness to select a photo of the same man from photos of a good number (say, a hundred) of young black men of similar appearance. In the Butler case, it seems highly probable that Mr Stephens would have failed such a test.

An afterthought - why two defense advocates addressing the jury instead of one? How usual is this?

I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that ye may be mistaken.