Abstract
What happens to a country under constant surveillance? The recent decision in Atkins v The Queen provides a partial answer.1 The sheer availability of images seems to be driving decisions about their admissibility and use as identification evidence. Confronted with CCTV recordings associated with criminal activities English courts have been reluctant to restrict their admission or impose limitations on the scope or form of incriminating opinion derived from them. Although the Court of Appeal decision in Atkins v The Queen is concerned primarily with the way in which an opinion derived from CCTV images was expressed, the decision exposes jurisprudential weakness and continuing problems with photo comparison and facial-mapping evidence.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 146-166 |
| Journal | The International Journal of Evidence & Proof |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Apr 2010 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Atkins v The Emperor: the ‘cautious’ use of unreliable ‘expert’ opinion'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver