Member

The conundrum that has faced us all is how to achieve this without inadvertently bringing the criminal justice system to a standstill, because it is estimated that, as at the present day, 90% of criminal cases involve the prosecution relying on some kind of computer evidence. In most cases, that computer evidence is entirely uncontroversial—for example, CCTV evidence or notes produced from accident and emergency—but what needs to be understood is that were we to remove the presumption of computer reliability, that is not neutral because of the legal maxim: he who asserts must prove. That means that if we remove the presumption, the prosecution must prove the reliability of the device in every single case—and defence lawyers are there to make sure that it does. I can say this with confidence, because I have been one of them, picking away at how to challenge admissibility if it is in my client’s interests. It is what good defence lawyers do.