Presentation of evidence Part 2
Based on part 1:
The type and amount of evidence and the order in which it is received and presented will, of course, be determined by the characteristics of the case, the client’s requirements, the method of the investigators (Functioning procedure) and the country’s judicial procedures however, there is also much in common with how the investigators carry out their work and get their testimony.
The investigator is entrusted with the work of obtaining and providing information that will be used by his clients or the client’s legal team in civil or criminal cases against another person or organization and at that time he acknowledged that each case will be treated differently, the processes are used to obtain and the provision of information will be similar.
In the United Kingdom, there is special legislation in place that affects the activities of investigators, especially those involved in government agencies (police, revenue and customs, social services, etc.).
An example of legislation in the UK: -
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996
Protection from prosecution law 1998
Data Protection Act 1998
Human Rights Act 1998
Regulation of Investigative Powers Act 2000
The evidence obtained and submitted by the investigator, of course, must be relevant, be accurate records of the activities of the accused / goals (observation log / report), inspire confidence (photographs, statements, audio / video evidence, where appropriate) and verify all those who had contact with any part of it (signed at their work), more on that later.
Therefore, it is important that the investigator provides on-site procedures to work correctly with the information, from the first contact with the client to the point where any final report (s) is submitted to the client or legal team. All documentation will be open on the other hand, and they will seek to discredit investigators with evidence based on a procedural error, non-factual allegations, or other discrepancies, or defend a counterclaim against their own evidence.
Errors identified especially during criminal proceedings can lead to the entire case of dismissal (thrown out) by a court decision. The top, of course, is that solid evidence that, beyond reproach, can be sued by the end much earlier, with acquittal, guilty plea, or admission of responsibility.
The investigator should include as much information as possible in the surveillance logs that they own or can reasonably suggest are the legal groups of their clients, or in this regard, the other side can interrogate them about the cross-examination process (the investigator can work on both sides in both civil and criminal proceedings )
A legal group acting in defense of the accused / target will seek to discredit evidence provided by the other party. This will include testimony and, of course, evidence presented by any “expert witnesses." The other side will try to confuse the witness and the jury will also try to question the integrity of the civil case.
The tactics of both parties will largely depend on the type of case, the evidence presented and the “Caliber” of the witnesses who will testify.
For example, both parties will attempt to demonstrate one of the following actions may apply;
• Insufficient evidence has been provided.
• The correct procedures were not followed.
• Statements are false.
• Photos have been tampered with.
• The certificate was processed on those people.
• Documents were not stored or transported safely.
• no verification was performed.
• The wrong target followed.
• Did not see the target for long enough.
• Observation of the target was hidden.
• There were many people in the area.
• The goal was too far.
• Target seems to be hidden.
• Target does not own the vehicle.
• Day and time were wrong.
• Journal entries are not clear.
• The circumstances were mixed up.
• There is confusion about the clothes of the targets.
• Some images are not clear enough.
• The building was cited.
• The weather conditions were different.
• The environment was too noisy.
• Materials degraded.
• There is a personal vendetta against the target.
Providing the information stated by the client by the investigator is accurate, reliable and has been properly verified, there should not be any problems, however, if loopholes exist in the procedures of the investigators and the collection of evidence, good lawyers will find them and they will be used.
It is worth noting here, the investigator can use positive reinforcement to defend statements during interrogation the other way, for example;
(Q): Are you sure you have the right day?
(A): Yes, because it was my wedding anniversary.
(Q): Are you sure the jumper he was wearing was cream and blue?
(A): Yes, because I have one exactly the same.
(Q): How can you be sure that this is the right person?
(A): This person resembles my brother-in-law.
One area that should be indicated relates to the storage order. This may be subject to control by the other side. The supply chain deals with how physical evidence is managed from its recovery to presentation as evidence. It is important to include all outsourcing services to third parties in order to process evidence.
An example of this may be: - photographs taken from development.
The investigator should take all possible measures to ensure the supply chain is fully documented, clearly stating as a chronological and logical procedure for receipt, processing, packaging, transportation, hand and collection, delivery, presentation, etc. evidence to include dates and times, as well as approved by all parties signing away at their work.
For example:
• Who transported photos to be developed?
• How were they transported safely?
• When were they transported?
• Who received the photo negatives for development?
• When do they get more photos?
• Where were they spent waiting for development?
• Who designed the photos?
• When were they developed?
• Where were they in storage pending collection?
• Who collected more photos?
• When were the photographs taken?
• How were they transporting the next collection?
• When were the photos transported?
• Where are they stored in the next collection?
• How are they used in evidence?
• Who transported them to the client?
• When were the photos transported to the client?
• How were the photos transported to the client?
• Who received more customer photos?
• When there were photos taken by the client.
(Email can simplify the movement of digital photos).
Finally ;
The investigator may have “checked all the boxes,” but other events take place against which there is little or no protection, as we discovered many years ago. Although a good solid case, to the surprise of our clients of the legal team and ourselves, the district judge simply decided to throw away the case, simply because he did not want to deal with a construction dispute. The needles to say the legal team on the other side were very released, given that they were aware of the evidence against them.
We would like to thank everyone for reading our post, and if it helps only one person, then the game is worth the candle.
Hope to follow up on this topic soon.
Hello
Jennifer and Mark Overthrow
Eye on year to year research
Great Britain
Following on from Part 1:
The type and quantity of evidence and the manner, in which it is obtained and submitted will of course be determined by the characteristics of the case, the requirements of the client, the investigators method of operation (Modus operandi) and the countries judicial procedures however ; there are also many similarities in the way investigators carry out their work and obtain their evidence.
The investigator is tasked with the job of obtaining and submitting information that will be used by their client or the client's legal team, in civil or criminal proceedings against another individual or organization and whilst it is acknowledged that every case will be viewed differently, the processes utilized in obtaining and submitting information will be similar.
In the United Kingdom, there is specific legislation in place which impacts upon the activities of investigators, especially those acting for Public Bodies (Police, Revenue & Customs, Social Services etc).
Example of Legislation in force in the UK: -
Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984
Criminal Procedures & Investigations Act 1996
Protection from Harassment Act 1998
Data Protection Act 1998
Human Rights Act 1998
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Evidence obtained and submitted by the investigator must of course be relevant to the case, be an accurate account of the defendants / targets activities (surveillance log / report), be credible (photographs, statements, audio / video evidence where acceptable) and verified by all those who have had contact with any part of it (signed off on their work), more about this later.
It is important therefore, the investigator ensures procedures are in place to handle information correctly, from the first contact with the client to the point where any final report (s) are submitted to the client or legal team. All documentation will be disclosed to the other side and they will seek to discredit the investigators evidence on the basis of a procedural error, non-factual statements, or other discrepancy or to defend a counter-claim against their own evidence.
Errors identified especially during criminal proceedings, may result in the entire case being dismissed (thrown out) by the court. The upside of course is that good solid evidence which is beyond reproach can bring proceedings to a close much sooner, with an acquittal, a guilty plea or admission of liability.
The investigator should include as much information as possible in the surveillance logs, which they know or may reasonably assume their client's legal team, or for that matter the other side may question them about during cross-examination (the investigator may be working for either side in both civil and criminal proceedings).
The legal team acting for the defense of the accused / target, will seek to discredit the evidence submitted by the other side. This will include witness testimonies and of course evidence provided by any 'Expert Witnesses'. The other side will attempt to confuse the witness and the jury also attempt to cast doubt upon the integrity of any civil proceedings.
The tactics employed by either side will depend largely upon the type of case, the evidence submitted and the 'caliber' of the witnesses who will testify.
For example, either side will attempt to demonstrate any of the following may apply;
• Insufficient evidence has been presented.
• Correct procedures have not been followed.
• Statements are false.
• Photographs have been tampered with.
• Evidence has been handled by the wrong people.
• Documents were not stored or transported safely.
• Validation has not been received.
• The wrong target has been followed.
• Did not see the target for long enough.
• Observation of the target was obscured.
• There were lots of people in the vicinity.
• The target was too far away.
• The target appears to be concealed.
• The target does not own a vehicle.
• The day and time were wrong.
• The entries in the log are not clear.
• The circumstances have been mixed up.
• There is confusion about the targets clothing.
• Some images are not clear enough.
• The wrong building has been cited.
• The weather conditions were different.
• The environment was too noisy.
• Materials have degraded.
• There is a personal vendetta against the target.
Providing the information presented to the client by the investigator is accurate, credible and has been adequately validated, there should not be any problems however; if loopholes do exist in the investigators procedures and evidence gathering, a good legal team will find them and they will be exploited.
It is worth noting here, the investigator can use positive reinforcement to defend the statements during questioning by the other side for example;
(Q): Are you sure you have the correct day?
(A): Yes because it was my wedding Anniversary.
(Q): Are you sure the jumper he was wearing was cream and blue?
(A): Yes because I have one exactly the same.
(Q): How can you be sure this is the right person?
(A): This person resembles my brother-in-law.
One area to be mentioned relates to the Chain of Custody. This can be the subject of scrutiny by the other side. Chain of Custody deals with the way in which physical evidence is managed from its recovery through to submission as evidence. It is important to include all outsourcing of services to third parties for the purpose of processing the evidence.
An example of this would be: - photographs taken away for development.
The investigator should take all possible steps to ensure the Chain of Custody is fully documented, clearly stating both the chronological and logical procedure for obtaining, handling, packing, transportation, hand over and collection, delivery, submission etc of the evidence, to include dates & times and also validated by all parties signing off on their work.
For example:
• Who transported the photos to be developed?
• How they were transported safely?
• When were they transported?
• Who received the photo negatives for development?
• When did they receive the photos?
• Where were they held awaiting development?
• Who developed the photos?
• When were they developed?
• Where they were stored awaiting collection?
• Who collected the photos?
• When were the photos collected?
• How were they transported following collection?
• When were the photos transported?
• Where were they stored following collection?
• How were they utilized in the evidence?
• Who transported them to the client?
• When were the photos transported to the client?
• How were the photos transported to the client?
• Who received the clients photos?
• When were the photos received by the client.
(Email can simplify the movement of digital photos).
Finally;
The investigator may have “ticked all the boxes” but other events do occur against which there is little or no defense as we discovered many years ago. Despite having a good solid case, to the surprise of our clients legal team and ourselves, a District Judge just opted to throw out the case, simply because he did not wish to deal with a building dispute. Needles to say the legal team on the other side were immensely relieved, considering they were aware of the evidence against them.
We would like to thank everyone for reading our post and if this helps just one person then it is worthwhile.
Hope to follow up on this thread soon.
Regards
Jennifer & mark overthrow
Eye on yoy investigations
United kingdom
Представление доказательств Часть 2
Исходя из части 1 :
Тип и количество доказательств и порядке , в котором он получен и представлен , конечно, будет определяться характеристиками случае , требования клиента , метод следователи работы ( Порядок функционирования ) и страны судебные процедуры однако , есть также много общего в том, как следователи выполняют свою работу и получить их показания.
Следователь поручено работу получения и предоставления информации , которая будет использоваться на своих клиентов или юридической команды клиента, в гражданских или уголовных дела в отношении другого лица или организации и в то время он признал, что каждый случай будет рассматриваться по-разному, процессы используются для получения и предоставления информации будут аналогичными.
В Соединенном Королевстве , есть специальное законодательство в месте, которое оказывает воздействие на деятельность следователей, особенно тем, кто занимается государственными органами ( полиция , выручка и таможенных , социальные услуги и т.д. ) .
Пример законодательства в Великобритании : -
Полиция и доказательствах по уголовным делам Акт 1984
Уголовно-процессуальный и Исследования Акт 1996
Защита от преследования закона 1998
Data Protection Act 1998
Права человека Закон 1998
Регулирование следственных полномочий Закон 2000
Доказательства, полученные и представлен следователем , конечно, должны иметь отношение к делу, быть точный учет деятельности обвиняемых / целей ( журнал наблюдения / отчет) , вызывать доверие (фотографии, заявления , аудио / видео-доказательства , где приемлемо) и проверяется всех тех, кто имел контакт с любой его части ( подписаны на своей работе ), об этом чуть позже .
Поэтому важно , следователь обеспечивает процедуры на месте , чтобы правильно работать с информацией, с первого контакта с клиентом до точки, где любой окончательный отчет (ы) представления клиенту или юридической команды . Вся документация будет открыта с другой стороны , и они будут стремиться дискредитировать следователей доказательства на основе процедурную ошибку , не- фактических утверждений , или других расхождений или защищать встречный иск против собственных доказательств .
Ошибки , выявленные особенно в ходе уголовного судопроизводства , может привести к всей случае увольнения ( выброшен ) по решению суда. Верх , конечно, что солидные доказательства, которые вне упрека может предъявить иск к концу гораздо раньше , с оправданием , признания вины или признания ответственности .
Следователь должен включать столько информации, сколько возможно в журналах наблюдения, которым они владеют или могут обоснованно предположить юридической группы своих клиентов , или в этом отношении другая сторона может допросить их о ходе перекрестного допроса ( следователь может работать на обе стороны в обоих гражданского и уголовного судопроизводства ) .
Правовая группа , действующая в защиту обвиняемого / цели , будет стремиться дискредитировать доказательства, представленные другой стороной . Это будет включать свидетельские показания и, конечно, доказательства, представленные любых « свидетелей-экспертов » . Другая сторона будет пытаться запутать свидетеля и жюри также попытаться под сомнение целостность гражданскому делу .
Тактика обеих сторон во многом будет зависеть от типа случае , доказательства, представленные и "Калибр" из свидетелей , которые будут давать показания.
Например, обе стороны будут пытаться продемонстрировать одно из следующих действий могут применяться ;
• Недостаточное доказательства были представлены .
• не были соблюдены правильные процедуры .
• Заявления являются ложными.
• Фотографии были подделаны .
• Свидетельство было обработано на тех людей.
• Документы не были хранить или транспортировать безопасно.
• не проводилась проверка .
• последовалонеправильная цель .
• Не видел цель для достаточно долго.
• была скрыта Наблюдение цели.
• Были много людей в этом районе.
•цель была слишком далеко.
• Целевая кажется, быть скрыты .
• Целевая не является владельцем транспортного средства.
• День и время были не правы.
• Записи в журнале не ясны.
• Обстоятельства были перепутаны .
• Существует путаница в одежде мишеней .
• Некоторые изображения не достаточно ясно.
• был процитировантак здание .
• Погодные условия были разные.
• Среда было слишком шумным .
• Материалы , деградировали .
• Существует личная вендетта против цели .
Предоставление сведений, заявленных клиентом следователем , является точной , достоверной и был надлежащим образом проверены, не должно быть никаких проблем , однако , если лазейки существуют в процедурах следователей и сбора доказательств , хороший юристы найдут их , и они будут быть использованы .
Стоит отметить, здесь , следователь может использовать положительное подкрепление , чтобы защитить заявления во время допроса в другую сторону , например ;
(Q) : Вы уверены, что у вас есть правильный день?
(А) : Да , потому что это была моя годовщина свадьбы .
(Q) : Вы уверены, что перемычка он был одет был крем и синий ?
(А) : Да , потому что у меня есть один точно такой же .
(Q) : Как вы можете быть уверены, что это именно тот человек, ?
(А): Этот человек напоминает мой брат -в-законе .
Одной из областей, которая должна указываться относится к порядку хранения . Это может быть предметом контроля со стороны другой стороны. Цепь поставки сделок с тем, как вещественные доказательства управляется от ее восстановления до представления в качестве доказательств. Важно , чтобы включить все аутсорсинг услуг третьим сторонам с целью обработки доказательств.
Примером этого может быть: - фотографии, сделанные от развития .
Следователь должен принять все возможные меры для обеспеченияцепочки поставок полностью документирована , ясно заявляя как хронологическую и логическую процедуру получения , обработки, упаковки , транспортировки, руку и сбор, доставка, представления и т.д. доказательств , чтобы включить даты и раз , а также утвержденные всеми сторонами подписания прочь на своей работе.
Например:
• Кто транспортируется фотографий , которые будут разработаны ?
• Как они были перевезены безопасно ?
• Когда они были транспортировать?
• Кто получил фото негативы для развития ?
• Когда они получают больше фотографий ?
• Где были они провели в ожидании развития ?
• Кто разработал фотографий ?
• Когда они были разработаны ?
• Там, где они были в хранилищах в ожидании коллекция?
• Кто собрал больше фотографий ?
• Когда были фотографии собраны ?
• Как были они транспортировали Следующая коллекция ?
• Когда были фото транспортировать?
• Где они хранятся следующую коллекцию ?
• Как они используются в доказательствах ?
• Кто перевезли их клиенту ?
• Когда были фото транспортируется к клиенту ?
• Как были фото транспортируется к клиенту ?
• Кто получил больше фотографий клиентов ?
• Когда были фотографии , полученные клиентом .
( E-mail может упростить перемещение цифровых фотографий ) .
Наконец ;
Следователь , возможно, " пометил все коробки " , но и другие события происходят , против которых нет или почти нет защиты , поскольку мы обнаружили много лет назад. Несмотря на то, хороший твердый случай , к удивлению наших клиентов юридической команды и себя,окружной судья просто решили выбросить случай , просто потому, что он не хотел иметь дело с строительной спора. Иглы , чтобы сказать правовой команду на другой стороне были очень освобожден , учитывая, что они были осведомлены о доказательств против них .
Мы хотели бы поблагодарить всех за чтение наш пост , и если это помогает только один человек , то игра стоит свеч.
Надеюсь, следить за этой теме в ближайшее время.
привет
Дженнифер и Марк Свержение
Глаз на год к году исследований
Великобритания
Following on from Part 1:
The type and quantity of evidence and the manner, in which it is obtained and submitted will of course be determined by the characteristics of the case, the requirements of the client, the investigators method of operation (Modus operandi) and the countries judicial procedures however; there are also many similarities in the way investigators carry out their work and obtain their evidence.
The investigator is tasked with the job of obtaining and submitting information that will be used by their client or the client’s legal team, in civil or criminal proceedings against another individual or organisation and whilst it is acknowledged that every case will be viewed differently, the processes utilised in obtaining and submitting information will be similar.
In the United Kingdom, there is specific legislation in place which impacts upon the activities of investigators, especially those acting for Public Bodies (Police, Revenue & Customs, Social Services etc).
Example of Legislation in force in the UK:-
Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984
Criminal Procedures & Investigations Act 1996
Protection from Harassment Act 1998
Data Protection Act 1998
Human Rights Act 1998
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Evidence obtained and submitted by the investigator must of course be relevant to the case, be an accurate account of the defendants/targets activities (surveillance log / report), be credible (photographs, statements, audio/video evidence where acceptable) and verified by all those who have had contact with any part of it (signed off on their work), more about this later.
It is important therefore, the investigator ensures procedures are in place to handle information correctly, from the first contact with the client to the point where any final report(s) are submitted to the client or legal team. All documentation will be disclosed to the other side and they will seek to discredit the investigators evidence on the basis of a procedural error, non-factual statements, or other discrepancy or to defend a counter-claim against their own evidence.
Errors identified especially during criminal proceedings, may result in the entire case being dismissed (thrown out) by the court. The upside of course is that good solid evidence which is beyond reproach can bring proceedings to a close much sooner, with an acquittal, a guilty plea or admission of liability.
The investigator should include as much information as possible in the surveillance logs, which they know or may reasonably assume their client’s legal team, or for that matter the other side may question them about during cross-examination (the investigator may be working for either side in both civil and criminal proceedings).
The legal team acting for the defence of the accused / target, will seek to discredit the evidence submitted by the other side. This will include witness testimonies and of course evidence provided by any ‘Expert Witnesses’ . The other side will attempt to confuse the witness and the jury also attempt to cast doubt upon the integrity of any civil proceedings.
The tactics employed by either side will depend largely upon the type of case, the evidence submitted and the ‘calibre’ of the witnesses who will testify.
For example, either side will attempt to demonstrate any of the following may apply;
• Insufficient evidence has been presented.
• Correct procedures have not been followed.
• Statements are false.
• Photographs have been tampered with.
• Evidence has been handled by the wrong people.
• Documents were not stored or transported safely.
• Validation has not been undertaken.
• The wrong target has been followed.
• Did not see the target for long enough.
• Observation of the target was obscured.
• There were lots of people in the vicinity.
• The target was too far away.
• The target appears to be concealed.
• The target does not own a vehicle.
• The day and time were wrong.
• The entries in the log are not clear.
• The circumstances have been mixed up.
• There is confusion about the targets clothing.
• Some images are not clear enough.
• The wrong building has been cited.
• The weather conditions were different.
• The environment was too noisy.
• Materials have degraded.
• There is a personal vendetta against the target.
Providing the information presented to the client by the investigator is accurate, credible and has been adequately validated, there should not be any problems however; if loopholes do exist in the investigators procedures and evidence gathering, a good legal team will find them and they will be exploited.
It is worth noting here, the investigator can use positive reinforcement to defend the statements during questioning by the other side for example;
(Q): Are you sure you have the correct day?
(A): Yes because it was my wedding Anniversary.
(Q): Are you sure the jumper he was wearing was cream and blue?
(A): Yes because I have one exactly the same.
(Q): How can you be sure this is the right person?
(A): This person resembles my brother-in-law.
One area to be mentioned relates to the Chain of Custody. This can be the subject of scrutiny by the other side. Chain of Custody deals with the way in which physical evidence is managed from its recovery through to submission as evidence. It is important to include all outsourcing of services to third parties for the purpose of processing the evidence.
An example of this would be:- photographs taken away for development.
The investigator should take all possible steps to ensure the Chain of Custody is fully documented, clearly stating both the chronological and logical procedure for obtaining, handling, packing, transportation, hand over and collection, delivery, submission etc of the evidence, to include dates & times and also validated by all parties signing off on their work.
For example:
• Who transported the photos to be developed?
• How they were transported safely?
• When were they transported?
• Who received the photo negatives for development?
• When did they receive the photos?
• Where were they held awaiting development?
• Who developed the photos?
• When were they developed?
• Where they were stored awaiting collection?
• Who collected the photos?
• When were the photos collected?
• How were they transported following collection?
• When were the photos transported?
• Where were they stored following collection?
• How were they utilised in the evidence?
• Who transported them to the client?
• When were the photos transported to the client?
• How were the photos transported to the client?
• Who received the clients photos?
• When were the photos received by the client.
(Email can simplify the movement of digital photos).
Finally;
The investigator may have “ticked all the boxes” but other events do occur against which there is little or no defence as we discovered many years ago. Despite having a good solid case, to the surprise of our clients legal team and ourselves, a District Judge just opted to throw out the case, simply because he did not wish to deal with a building dispute. Needles to say the legal team on the other side were immensely relieved, considering they were aware of the evidence against them.
We would like to thank everyone for reading our post and if this helps just one person then it is worthwhile.
Hope to follow up on this thread soon.
Regards
Jennifer & Mark Overthrow
Eye on yoy Investigations
United Kingdom
Original message
