An expert report that is almost worse than useless An expert report that is almost worse than useless

An expert report that is almost worse than useless

The claimant was involved in a minor road traffic accident while she was the passenger in a car driven by her partner, who was the defendant’s...
When experts are the subject of regulatory complaints When experts are the subject of regulatory complaints

When experts are the subject of regulatory complaints

Most professionals who act as expert witnesses are potentially subject to fitness to practice or other types of regulatory or professional body...
The admin behind the expertise The admin behind the expertise

The admin behind the expertise

Highlights from the EWI Technology and Practice Survey 2026 A survey by the Expert Witness Institute, supported by Fortythree Tech
If you're wearing two hats, make sure you comply with the rules If you're wearing two hats, make sure you comply with the rules

If you're wearing two hats, make sure you comply with the rules

The expert acting for the appellant had appeared before the Valuation Tribunal for England as advocate and expert for the appellant, and he continued...
Experts and alienating behaviour: a fundamentally unsound process Experts and alienating behaviour: a fundamentally unsound process

Experts and alienating behaviour: a fundamentally unsound process

In this case, the Family Court makes clear the position with regard to people who describe themselves as psychologists but are not (a) regulated by a...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Call for evidence: Use of evidence generated by software in criminal proceedings
Sean Mosby 2221

Call for evidence: Use of evidence generated by software in criminal proceedings

bySean Mosby

 

The Ministry of Justice has published a call for evidence on the use of evidence generated by software in criminal proceedings.

The call for evidence is to help the Ministry better understand how the current presumption concerning the admissibility of computer evidence is working in practice, and whether it is fit for purpose in the modern world. The limitations of this presumption have been highlighted starkly by the Post Office Horizon scandal, which saw hundreds of sub-postmasters wrongly convicted based on evidence which is now known to have been false, due to faults in the Horizon accounting software system. This clearly demonstrated the fallibility of evidence produced by software. 

The Ministry wishes to increase its evidence base and understanding of the ways in which evidence produced by software is handled in criminal proceedings. This includes how this evidence is treated in other jurisdictions, and any challenges or issues with the current position in this country.

Current Common Law Presumption

Since 2000 there has been a common law (rebuttable) presumption that the computer was operating correctly at the material time. The presumption is a rebuttable one, meaning that if it can be shown that the software may not have been functioning correctly, the burden shifts to whoever is seeking to rely on the evidence to prove that it was. 

Proposed scope of any reform to the law

The Ministry is keen that any changes to the current common law presumption are carefully defined to only include that evidence which is generated by software, including Artificial Intelligence and algorithms. It believes that evidence which is merely captured or recorded by a device should be excluded.

Questions

The Ministry is seeking responses to a series of questions set out at the end of the call for evidence.

How to respond

You can respond to the call for evidence by email to computer.evidence@justice.gov.uk by 15 April 2025. The EWI will be submitting a response to the call for evidence. If you would like to provide input into the EWI's response, please contact us at policy@ewi.org.uk by 31 March 2025.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.