The Forensic Image Comparison investigation is the process of comparing digital images to generate the data for the trier of fact. This data is then presented and interpreted by the trier of fact to make determinations about. The investigation is most accurate when the images or videos are of sufficient quality, and they meet the comparison criteria. Although the majority of the investigations we perform are from digital images, images extracted from video evidence meet the criteria for image comparison also.
It is considered that today, the most prolific source of evidence for police is from video images. Video is not an accurate medium for identification on its own. This is because digital compression removes and adds information that wasn’t originally included. An Image Forensic Expert MUST be able to interpret the image data in order to compare the images.
Because of image unreliability of images, an Expert MUST also be able to qualify the events based on quality. This is done to ensure that the objects or people presented in them are accurate. This includes sufficient detail and pixel information. In some cases, when the objects or people displayed in the images and videos aren’t clear, we will perform a forensic video enhancement investigation. This may become necessary in order to see the details of the images more clearly. The video enhancement process will also reinforce the accuracy of the comparison investigation.
Exemplar VS Evidence
Evidence: Images or videos that contain objects or people that are considered UNKNOWN
Exemplar: Images or videos that contain objects or people that are considered KNOWN
Often times when an exemplar image or video is unavailable, we have to make other arrangements. An acceptable practice is to gain access or obtain similar equipment that was used to create the evidence. This equipment must be programmable to similar parameters that were used at the time that the evidence was recorded. This ensures the highest accuracy when comparing the images or videos forensically. If exhibits for courtroom use was generated using different equipment, it isn’t necessary to explain why. For that reason, if the details and events captured are sufficient in quality for comparison, this is acceptable.
The comparison criteria is defined by the standards presented by LEVA (Law Enforcement & Emergency Services Video Association).
A class characteristic is an identifiable feature that assists in narrowing the statistical probability that a questioned object or person belongs to the same group as a known object or person that shares the same feature. Consistent class characteristics between questioned objects and individuals can only suggest similarities and cannot, by themselves, be used to infer a positive identification.
A unique characteristic is an identifiable feature found on the questioned object or person that is found on no other object or person of similar class. A unique characteristic can be used to significantly narrow the probability that a known object or person is in fact the same questioned object or person. A thorough examination of class characteristics and unique characteristics contrasted and compared between questioned and known objects or persons may allow an experienced and properly qualified analyst to form an opinion, if it is safe to do so, that the objects are one in the same, eliminating all others of the same class.
Report, Peer Review & Testimony
It is our responsibility to the trier of fact to present observations in a simple unbiased nature. When we write our reports, we ensure that the foundation our opinions formulate from is scientific. This gives the testimony and report integrity, therefore making it “bulletproof” if you will. In other words, we do not generate opinions about the likelihood of objects or people based on a hunch. An example of a hunch could be a detail open to multiple interpretations or from digital compression artifacts. It is also acceptable to work with and consult other experts (vehicle experts) that are qualified to answer questions that we aren’t qualified to.
These principles strengthen an investigation to involve another expert that has additional experience and qualifications to make specific determinations about our findings once we have completed the comparison investigation. This strengthens our reports as well as our testimony. All forensic image comparison investigations we perform are also peer reviewed internally or externally to ensure that the methods & protocols used to generate our opinions are accurate in accordance with the scientific community.
If you have evidence that you need help understanding, please contact us for a pro-bono conversation. I apply my forensic expertise to cases in the United States and many countries around the globe. Any and all formats of audio and video accepted. Retainer agreement available on request; travel expenses will be quoted in advance excluding meal expenses and flat rate time for travel instead of hourly.
Click HERE to email your questions or
Call 800-647-4281 in the USA or +01-248-853-4091 Internationally.
Michael Primeau’s Curriculum Vitae has several references which include cases he has testified in as well as clients he has worked for in these cases.