Chain Of Custody Case Study
3. Explain chain of custody and expert opinion?
Chain of custody could be explained as an ability to give accurate accounting in a court of law as to the manner in which evidence was acquired, maintained, transported, examined, etc. by whom, when, where and for what purpose. It is a process to maintain the chronological history of the document/ evidence. Chain of custody documentation should include the name or initials of the individual collecting the evidence, dates the items were collected, each person or entity subsequently having custody of the evidence, dates that custody of the items was transferred, agency and case number, victim’s or suspect’s name, and a brief, yet specific description of the item. It describes the process as testified …show more content…
Usually the chain of custody need not be proved when both prosecution and defence agree.
The following 3 testimonies are required for a proper chain of custody:
a)evidence is that piece of evidence what it purports to be
b)evidence of continuous possession by each individual who has had possession of the evidence from the time it was seized until it was analysed in the laboratory
c)evidence that each person that the particular piece of evidence in his custody remained the same from the time it came to his possession till the same was taken custody by another.
In effect the chain of custody relates to total accounting for evidence and its continuity of possession. The chain is made of individuals in whose custody the evidence lies, from the time of its collection and each of them is responsible for its safe keeping and preservation so long as the same is under their control.
Maintaining the chain of custody:
The following steps to help maintain the chain of custody efficiently and …show more content…
The Act only provides about the relevancy of the opinion but gives no evidence as to its value. The value of expert opinion has to be considered in the light of the following adverse factors – (1) danger of error of deliberate falsehood (2) it is only a human opinion and his knowledge is limited and imperfect (3) there is likelihood that his opinion could be prejudiced in favour of the side which calls him. These factors seriously reduce the probative value of expert evidence. The reliability hence should be tested like any other piece of evidence being tested. The court should, therefore call upon the expert to explain the reasons for his opinion and then forms its own opinion as to whether the opinion is satisfactory or
Chain of custody could be explained as an ability to give accurate accounting in a court of law as to the manner in which evidence was acquired, maintained, transported, examined, etc. by whom, when, where and for what purpose. It is a process to maintain the chronological history of the document/ evidence. Chain of custody documentation should include the name or initials of the individual collecting the evidence, dates the items were collected, each person or entity subsequently having custody of the evidence, dates that custody of the items was transferred, agency and case number, victim’s or suspect’s name, and a brief, yet specific description of the item. It describes the process as testified …show more content…
Usually the chain of custody need not be proved when both prosecution and defence agree.
The following 3 testimonies are required for a proper chain of custody:
a)evidence is that piece of evidence what it purports to be
b)evidence of continuous possession by each individual who has had possession of the evidence from the time it was seized until it was analysed in the laboratory
c)evidence that each person that the particular piece of evidence in his custody remained the same from the time it came to his possession till the same was taken custody by another.
In effect the chain of custody relates to total accounting for evidence and its continuity of possession. The chain is made of individuals in whose custody the evidence lies, from the time of its collection and each of them is responsible for its safe keeping and preservation so long as the same is under their control.
Maintaining the chain of custody:
The following steps to help maintain the chain of custody efficiently and …show more content…
The Act only provides about the relevancy of the opinion but gives no evidence as to its value. The value of expert opinion has to be considered in the light of the following adverse factors – (1) danger of error of deliberate falsehood (2) it is only a human opinion and his knowledge is limited and imperfect (3) there is likelihood that his opinion could be prejudiced in favour of the side which calls him. These factors seriously reduce the probative value of expert evidence. The reliability hence should be tested like any other piece of evidence being tested. The court should, therefore call upon the expert to explain the reasons for his opinion and then forms its own opinion as to whether the opinion is satisfactory or