Using Video Link to Take Forensic Evidence—Lessons from an Australian Case Study
| Date | 01 July 2013 |
| Published date | 01 July 2013 |
| DOI | 10.1350/ijep.2013.17.3.428 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
USING VIDEO LINK TO TAKE FORENSIC EVIDENCE Using video link to take
forensic evidence—
lessons from an
Australian case study
By Anne Wallace*
School of Law and Justice Professor, Edith Cowan University,
Australia
Abstract This article examines the use of audio-visual communications
technology (specifically, video link) to enable courts to receive forensic evidence
in criminal cases. It outlines the legislative powers to take evidence via video
link in Australia, identifying their broad discretionary nature, and analysing
relevant case law on their interpretation. The article then discusses empirical
findings from an Australian case study in a jurisdiction where a police forensic
service has a policy to promote the use of this technology to take evidence from
its staff. The findings suggest that, although the policy has had some success in
influencing the approach of courts to the exercise of their powers to take
evidence this way, video links are not being used as widely as originally
envisaged. The reasons for this have to do both with the availability of the
technology itself, and perceptions about its adequacy to deliver the evidence,
particularly evidence that is complex, or requires the use of supporting visual
aids.
Keywords Forensic; Video link; Evidence
n 1998, delegates at a court technology conference in Melbourne,
Australia were given a presentation by a young forensic scientist,
Jason Ferridge. The presentation was made in the course of a session
doi:10.1350/ijep.2013.17.3.428
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF (2013) 17 E&P 221–249 221
I
* Email: a.wallace@ecu.edu.au.
by the courts in the State of Victoria about their use of videoconferencing
technology.1
Jason was beamed live into the conference venue in an inner-city hotel from a
special-purpose videoconferencing room in the Victorian Police Forensic
Laboratory in the Melbourne suburb of McLeod, to demonstrate to a packed
session the way that this technology could be used to enable a forensic scientist to
give evidence to a courtroom from another location.
An engaging and enthusiastic presenter, Jason left his audience in no doubt that
videoconferencing technology could be an effective means of communicating
witness testimony to a courtroom. The presentation detailed what appeared to be
quite compelling arguments for its use on cost and efficiency grounds; rather than
having busy professionals waste time travelling and waiting at court for their
matters to come on, they could carry on with their normal professional duties
until they were summonsed to the remote witness room in their work facility, give
their evidence straight away, and then be released back to their normal work
duties. Jason even used some demonstrative tools, including a camera view that
enabled the conference participants to see a close-up of striations on the inside
surface of the barrel of a gun, to demonstrate that the technology might enable a
jury to see some evidence more clearly than they could in a courtroom.2
Nearly 15 years have passed since that conference. If the arguments put forward in
that presentation were correct, one might expect that Victorian courts would now
be making routine use of this technology to take forensic evidence. However, this
article reveals that this is not the case.
Using data drawn from Victorian Police Forensic Service court attendance forms
over a recent 18-month period, it explores the factors that are influencing the use
of videoconferencing to take forensic evidence. The analysis suggests that while
cost and efficiency are influential considerations, particularly in committal
hearings, and in trials in some regional courts, there are countervailing influ-
ences. Perceptions of the adequacy of the technology to deliver the evidence, and
222 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF
USING VIDEO LINK TO TAKE FORENSIC EVIDENCE
1 Chief Judge Glen Waldron et al., ‘Audio Visual Technology and Victorian Courts’, paper presented
at the Australian Institute of Judicial Administration Technology for Justice Conference,
Melbourne, 24 March 1998, available at <http://www.aija.org.au/conference98/papers/wjaf/
Techlaw.html>, accessed 14 May 2013.
2 Author’s notes, presentation by Jason Ferridge at the Australian Institute of Judicial Adminis-
tration Technology for Justice Conference, Melbourne, 24 March 1998; see Chief Judge Glen
Waldron et al., above n. 1.
To continue reading
Request your trial