Posted By Phil Roberts In my former life as a photographer I was asked on several occasions to take photographs of personal injuries to be used in court for damages claims. On one occasion I was asked to photgraph a damaged pavement area before the local council repaired it. This again was for a damages claim. All these photographs were provided on 35mm. 7x5 prints. The negatives were also provided to prove no manipulation had taken place. All the photographs were requested by solicitors and used in subsequent court cases. I am sure other types of print such as polaroid would be acceptable but digital images can be easily manipulated and my guess is they would not be acceptable. Hope this helps Regards Phil Roberts

Posted By Phil Roberts An addenda to my previous posting. Proof of time and place was by sworn affidavit. I did not have to attend court. Regards Phil

Posted By Adrian Watson A photograph (or film) the relevance of which can be established by the testimony of someone with personal knowledge of the circumstances in which it was taken (or made), may also be admitted to prove the commission of an offence and the identity of the offender. The contents of photographs and films on which a party seeks to rely may be proved by production of the original; or by production of a copy proved to be an authentic copy; or by the parol evidence of witnesses who have seen the photograph or film.

Posted By Andy Lucas Graham, There is nothing wrong in using any type of visual presentation. A photograph merely assists the court in it's understanding of a case. A description should always be given in a Section 9 Witness statement provided by the person presenting the photographic evidence just in case the photo etc is not accepted. The photo etc should be seen as a means of assisting the court and a way to put the icing on the judicial cake. If the photo merely shows a fact ie there was no guard to machinery then a photo is ideal, however be careful if the photo is meant to show the extent of a problem ie how dark or dirty something is, as you may be asked technical questions about the use of the photo as it is open to adulteration etc. Other things to consider are the impact of the Human Rights act and the right of privacy when taking the photo. If permission has not been granted by persons in the photo you may run into trouble exhibiting the evidence. As an enforcement officer I have relied heavily upon photo evidence without any problems. Colleagues of mine have used video evidence extensively. As long as you are careful the courts are generally grateful to have such visual evidence. Hope this is ok Andy