PHOTOGRAPHS
Can a photograph be admissible as evidence at the court of justice? Well, it depends on the manner, relevancy and importance of its presentation as evidence. As we all know, photographs like videos can be edited, spliced, diced, copy and then paste to look like a new photograph, in short a manufactured one, it does not constitute the truth that it is trying to conceal. That’s the reason why the court of justice now is wary in accepting photographs as evidence. However there is certain exceptions to that, where photographs no matter how digitized can be admitted as an evidence.
Case No.1
When the photographs show the philandering husband with the mistress in a very compromising position, even if it was taken only on a cell phone, it is proof enough of the illicit affair. Would it stand? Perhaps, it depends on the argument of the counsel.
Case No. 2
When the photographs, on a sequence shots shows the commission of a crime, an ongoing robbery, screen shots of a video of a theft or robbery.
Case No 3.
The worse case, when you are under surveillance by the police agents or operatives, where they tracked your movements, friends and relatives and the information that they get will be used against you. All of the information, videos and photographs came from you. Your cell phone, computers as well as your records were hacked, and then reproduced into something new, a different you. Can these persons be convicted of these illegal actions? Perhaps, if you have proof that your photographs were used in a different way and in an illegal means.
My husband and I has been a victim of these cyber robbers, they grabbed your pictures, copy then paste it into another photos of a person to make it believe that I’m on that photo with that person, however such photo ops never happen. I’m just privileged enough to have friends who knows how to tracked these cyber robbers/hackers. Who else could hacked the hackers but the hackers themselves.
