NCJ Number
179751
Journal
Law and Order Volume: 47 Issue: 10 Dated: October 1999 Pages: 108-114
Date Published
1999
Length
7 pages
Annotation
Digital photography has been widely accepted by law enforcement and requires procedures to ensure its admissibility as evidence in court.
Abstract
Digital imaging costs less than film photography, enables photographers to preview their images at the crime scene so they know they have the images they need, and allows a number of images that is limited only by the storage media and the life of the power source. The difference between digital and film images is the media on which the images are stored. The reluctance to use digital imagery for gathering evidence stems mostly from the notion that digital images can be manipulated far more easily than conventional film images. Courts have apparently accepted the digital enhancement of images, but concern remains regarding the issue of tampering. However, the technique used to produce the image is far less crucial than is the veracity of the witness that lays the foundation for the admission of the evidence. The reliability of digital evidence and all other evidence is largely continent on the trier of fact's perception of a witness's credibility. In addition, users should use specific tactics to preserve and store images and should fully document steps taken to enhance an image and bring the evidentiary detail to the surface. Police agencies should keep meticulous records of stored images. Disadvantages of digital photography include its lower versatility than film photography, the high cost of cameras that will accept an accessory lens, its unsuitability for time exposures and other situations, and the large amount of power needed. Photographs