Hi
I would be grateful if you could send the information you have on the
evidence of computerised records.
Thanks
Kay May
Student Placement
Data Protection
Room J255a Ext No.2426
University of Glamorgan Tel No. 01443 480480
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 28 January 2000 08:55
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Digital/Electronic Evidence in Court - Re CCTV
>
>
>
> Response to:-
> Tim Chown wrote:
>
> > ".................
> >
> > The bulk eraser bit is interesting, and the suggestion that re-recording
> > over old tapes is not accpetible in court.
> >
> > If data is gathered digitally, and a file system is a dynamic set of
> > 0's and 1's, does every captured image have to be recorded on a freshly
> > formatted file system? Yikes."
>
> Just because a tape has been recorded over does not affect its
> admissibility in English Courts as a source of the information it
> contains.
>
> The main issue now with digital/electronic evidence in English courts is
> proving 1) the reliability of the tape as a source of information and 2)
> the reliability of the information it contains. This assumes the
> information is also relevant to the issues in dispute and to
> establishing the facts.
>
> Evidence is just information used to determine which of disputed facts
> are true.
>
> There is no legal reason why a re-recorded tape should not be admissible
> as evidence. The only question is whether it can be demonstrated that
> the information it contains is reliable. That can be achieved through a
> combination of precautions. This is not just an issue of showing that
> the tape was not tampered with.
>
> For a detailed analysis of the essential nature of evidence and what
> 'reliability' is in the context of electronic evidence see either:-
>
> - 'Electronic Evidence - Can You Prove the Transaction Took Place?'
> The Computer Lawyer Vol 9 No 5 May 1992 (Prentice Hall Law & Business)
>
> - 'Computer-generated Evidence - Implications for the Corporate
> Computer User - Part 1' - Computer Law & Practice Vol 6 No 6 pages
> 177-212 July-August 1990.
>
> If anyone wants a copy in a compact electronic .pdf format I can send
> it.
>
> The above references are for the same article published in US and
> English law journals. The first version is a shorter edited version of
> the other.
>
> The articles are and will remain valid in relation to the legal concept
> of evidential reliability.
>
> The English criminal and civil law has changed dramatically since they
> were written, by abolishing the hearsay rule and introducing a more
> favourable regime for admissibility of electronic (and other kinds) of
> vidence in legal proceedings. But be warned, if you cannot show your
> electronic evidence is reliable you can face difficulties, especially in
> criminal proceedings.
>
> These articles (by me) have been favourably commented on and arose from
> teaching the law of evidence as part of and examining a compulsory
> course for Imperial College's BEng Masters degree course in Software
> Engineering some while ago.
>
> --
>
> From:
>
> Clifford G. Miller
> CLIFFORD MILLER
> Coborn House
> Coborn Road
> London E3 2DA
> England
>
> http://www.millercompany.demon.co.uk
> Tel: + 44 181 983 6688
> Fax: + 44 181 983 6699
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|