POLICE must embrace any and all forms of evidential documentation, including visual evidence, during the course of any investigation that increases the transparency in the manner they carry out their duties.

This is part of enhancing the credibility of the admissibility of evidence collected at any stage of investigations.

It is also to their benefit to do so. Appeals for oral and physical evidence, witnesses and any other documentary evidence are a common tool used by investigators looking to gather as much evidence as possible.

It is fair then to assume that the public is encouraged to document any evidence, (including visual evidence) during investigations. It is accepted as assistance in the overall scope of any ongoing investigation.

The police will study all the relevant evidence from all aspects to the facts in issue. This will be useful to dispel any allegations that may disrupt making out a prima facie case.

More often than not, allegations of injury, threats, inducements or promises are made by unscrupulous suspects or by those who have vested interests in a criminal act.

They have the knack to conjure up unfounded allegations against investigators during the course of investigations. Visual evidence dispels these allegations and will inevitably reduce dramatic and far fetched allegations when court proceedings commence.

Confessions and admissions have always faced an uphill task during the course of any trial and, administratively, the investigator is discouraged from being too dependent on such evidence.

The difficulty of the courts in deciding which evidence is exculpatory or inculpatory is well documented, requiring strong corroborative evidence. Visual evidence can be a game changer in helping to ascertain the validity of any allegation and help to make such confessions and admissions admissible.

It is in the best interest of the police to encourage video recordings, photographs and such to supplement and complement their bona fide intentions to investigate and gather credible admissible evidence.

Most officers comply with investigative standard operating procedures and have nothing to worry about when it comes to such documentary evidence, as long as they carry out their duties and subsequent actions in good faith.

Most raids to seize and arrest are done professionally, although there may be the odd one out. Visual evidence from any source will be more of a boon than a bane for investigators and will reduce unfounded afterthought allegations of wrongdoing.

Senior officers in the past have always been willing to embrace and engage any allegation of wrongdoing by any personnel and were grateful if any visual evidence was offered to enlighten any allegation.

They made it clear that they would not tolerate any allegation of wrongdoing by any police personnel. On the other hand, if the visual evidence has elements of mala fide intent, the law will come down hard on the maker of such evidence.

It worked both ways. What was more important was the fact that any evidence offered was welcome as part of the overall investigations of a case. The police always keeps an open mind to all evidence available.

It is opined that the police must engage, embrace and encourage all visual evidence of any public action so as to ensure that the image of the police is at the highest level of professionalism and that all investigators are kept on their toes in preparation to face allegations under severe cross-examination during trial.

I am sure police investigators can meet that requirement quite comfortably. – November 14, 2020.

* G. Selva reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.