Criminal Justice Committee 11 June 2025
Apologies, convener—I have quite a long speaking note for this group of amendments.
I will first speak to amendments 44 to 46, which were lodged by Mr Kerr, and amendment 93, which was lodged by Pauline McNeill.
Amendment 44 would not be compatible with the roll-out of the digital evidence sharing capability—DESC—system. Where electronic evidence is stored on DESC, as opposed to on a tape or disc, there will be nothing that can be physically lodged and the list of productions will simply note that the item in question is a digital production. Given that the amendment would require the lodging of a physical item, it would not permit the use of DESC to store digital evidence and share it in court.
Amendment 45 would have the effect of making the use of physical productions the continued default. That would also significantly inhibit the roll-out of DESC and require substantial amounts of court time and resource to be taken up with applications to allow images to be used.
Amendment 46 is unnecessary and would serve no practical purpose. The ability for both the defence and the prosecution to apply for a judicial direction where they consider the image to be insufficient already provides a mechanism to deal with those issues clearly and promptly.