Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 05 June 2005 19:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Joel Gordon As part of accident investigations I undertake I sometimes take digital photographs of defected (or alleged defected) flooring, equipment etc. The digital photos evidence that I have taken so far has not as yet been used in a court case. Over the past few months some people have told me that digital photos are not admissable as evidence. But recently a solicitor told me that he thinks that they could now admissable in court. Can anyone please clarify. Many thanks
Admin  
#2 Posted : 05 June 2005 22:52:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jack I believe they can be used if sworn in by the person who took them. See this too: http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...rum=1&thread=2788&page=1
Admin  
#3 Posted : 06 June 2005 16:22:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By George Wedgwood In any serious investigation I have been involved in, ditital photos are always taken in addition to film as, if any doubt arises, film photos can be used as evidence. However, I still await a case where our own photos get used for more than just information! Usually the HSE take their own photos and insurers will use anything to bolster their case. The defence only seem to use photos as 'story telling' and not hard evidence from what I have seen so far. The last lot that were referred to in a recent court case, were all HSE photos that were referred to by both sides and not contested. We have also used site camera recording to show the HSE what the actual incident detail was - but not in court - yet! George
Admin  
#4 Posted : 06 June 2005 16:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jason McQueen It is my understanding that they can now be used in court as the technology now exists to examine the digital image for alterations.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 06 June 2005 17:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Merv Newman There was a previous thread on this, maybe six months ago. As I remember you have to "prove the chain" ie complete control of access to the originals. If you can do that then digital photos are admissable as evidence. If I'm wrong, sue me.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 06 June 2005 17:15:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Merv Newman To sue me that means that you have to PROVE that merv newman wrote that e-mail. I know how many other people, including my wife, my son and my secretary, have access to my e-mails and my passwords. You don't. Ho, ho, ho !
Admin  
#7 Posted : 06 June 2005 17:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martin J Morley In this day and age, it would seem foolhardy to restrict the use of digital images - but is the image accurate and could you prove that it is free from alterations? Successful procedures for digital need to rely on the same principles as conventional photography: use a 'decent' camera and have some understanding of the process, be able to demonstrate that the images are authentic and have come from the camera, were recorded by it and have not been altered. (Many cameras now record enough information along with the image to be able to do this automatically) be able to answer questions asked about the photography and the scene. So set the image quality high enough, snap but don't delete and use a new card for each investigation. The key text of the Digital Imaging Procedures document is now at: http://uk.sitestat.com/h....uk/docs/digimpro.pdf%5D A short article can be found at: http://www.ehj-online.co...ve/2000/july/july05.html and the CPS information at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/le...apter_f.html#_Toc7839916 HSE has a section on 'Physical Evidence in Court - Introduction' which is at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/en...court/physical/intro.htm Hope this helps, martin
Admin  
#8 Posted : 08 June 2005 17:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mike Palfrey I hope they aren't admissible in court. That would mean loads of speeding fines would be quashed! (Yeah right!) Cheers
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.