SLAMorris Final Thesis After Corrections.pdf - Cranfield University

In Jurisprudence, admissibility is the term used to describe evidence which is
allowed to be presented in court. For a piece of evidence to be considered for
admission in court it must be shown to be reliable and relevant to the case
[Kenneally, 2004]. The definition of relevance was restated in R v Nethercott
[2001]:
“any two facts to which it is applied are so related to each other according to the
common course of events one either taken by itself or in conjunction with other
facts proves or renders probable the past, present or future existence or nonexistence
of the other”
In order to show digital evidence is relevant it needs to have probative value;
evidence needs to provide information which supports or refutes the case’s
hypothesis. The ability to refute or accept a hypothesis in a case may rely on a
combination of related artefacts which when considered together show an
action or series of events which impacts on the likelihood of the hypothesis. In a
criminal case it is generally the Judge who is responsible for determining
whether evidence meets the criteria for relevance and is admissible [Ramjohn,
2009]. Whilst most evidence which can be shown to meet the definition for
relevance is considered admissible there are situations where relevant evidence
is excluded; these are known as exclusionary rules. The weight given to each
piece of evidence is generally determined by the Jury when considering its
importance in relation to the rest of the information in the case [Taylor, 2012]
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) [1984] section 69 states the
situations where evidence found from a computer would be deemed
inadmissible in court; these are exclusionary rules of evidence. It states it is
necessary to confirm the accuracy of the relationship between the original
evidence and that documented in an analyst’s case report. This is reflected in
the ACPO guidelines [2010] which state it is necessary to minimise alterations
Page 49