printer friendly version

SAPS forensics laboratory

Hi-Tech Security Solutions asks what SAPS requires from video footage.

Sergeant Lebo Maimane, a forensic image analyst at the SAPS’s forensics department in Silverton, Pretoria firmly believes that businesses and the public need to be educated on the quality of CCTV footage that is admissible for evidentiary purposes.

Hi-Tech Security Solutions caught up with Maimane, who presented at the iLegal 2010 conference.

“Obviously with municipal entities like Safe City, we are guaranteed the correct level of footage quality since these entities work very closely and on a regular basis, with both the SAPS and the relevant prosecuting authorities,” Maimane said. “However, with regard to most of the image evidence we receive, there is often no consideration given to the admissibility of the footage.”

Maimane said a good starting point is determining the most strategic placement of CCTV cameras. The most commonly requested information from the complainant is for facial identification. “Generally, we would be unable to admit material into evidence for facial recognition if the face is in shadow, or obscured by headgear or other secondary obstructions. Due consideration needs to be given to the camera angle as well as the varying lighting conditions. Camera installers should undertake tests whereby they analyse each of these scenarios and adjust the camera placement accordingly.”

Another possible area of ambiguous identification occurs where the system is not managed correctly. “The primary concern should be on the quality of the camera recording. It is worth investing in a superior brand of camera in order to ensure the highest possible recording quality if correct facial analysis is to be assured,” said Maimane. “Something I really must emphasise is that we are not like CSI on TV – in simple terms, making an image bigger does not make it clearer.”

Chain of custody

Maimane said it is essential that when the system is first set up, the date and time stamp capabilities are activated. “This provides the SAPS and prosecuting authourities with finite information to work with.” Another bugbear is footage submitted which contains unreadable or partially identifiable vehicle registration numbers. “Once again, the clearer the footage, the more chance there is of the case being successfully tried and convicted in court.”

Maimane commended Safe City on the adherence to the chain of evidentiary custody they comply with. “There are specific guidelines regarding the submission of image footage into evidence for criminal prosecution and the first step would be the admission of the footage to an investigating officer in order to provide a high level of security of the material. It is essential for all investigating officers to be thoroughly trained in the correct handling and submission of this material.

“The chain of evidence followed by the SAPS involves the investigating officer (IO) bringing the exhibit to us in a sealed bag which has a case number attached to it. This is in essence where the forensics department’s responsibility begins,” said Maimane.

“We ensure that the evidence bag is sealed when we receive it, as a tampered evidence bag is a compromised evidence bag. We then remove the seal from the evidence bag, make a copy from the original medium and work with this copied footage. The original exhibit is locked in a safe. After our analysis of the footage, we compile the images into a digital photo album which is given back to the IO and the original material is also returned to the IO, in a separate sealed bag. This is where our area of responsibility ends.”

Authenticity

Maimane said that the forensics department is required to ensure authenticity in terms of sound consistency and continuity of images. “If the recording seems to have gaps there could be issues with its authenticity. We therefore check to see if the footage appears to have been edited in any way.

“We are sometimes called upon by the prosecuting authorities to testify in court to the authenticity of recordings. We are also regularly asked to testify that the same person appears consistently within the footage. We would typically look at elements such as identifying marks (scars and tattoos), clothing and gestures or behavioural idiosyncrasies,” she added.

“We have had a number of challenging cases and a number of cases which could be considered text book ‘open and shut’. Some factors which guarantee a better possibility of correct identification include the presence of logos and branding on clothing and unique features on motor vehicles. We acknowledge that not all footage will be ideal, but we would like to offer some pointers that will make the identification process more finite and thus increase the chances of apprehending and prosecuting the alleged criminal. These include:

Surveillance tips

For the complainant:

* Make sure the recorded footage is actually on the CD or DVD you present to the SAPS investigating officer.

* Bring the master copy of the footage to the SAPS. Copies are not admissible.

For the SAPS investigating officer:

* View the footage with the complainant before handing it in for analysis.

* Ensure that the evidence is sealed in an evidence bag, with the necessary documentation attached.

Share this article:

Further reading: