Legal integrity of EXIF data

For legal reasons I need to prove I was in a certain place on a specific date.
Basically I hired a car to go camping in the Lake District and I am on several shots. However, some other person is commiting traffic offences in the borough of Ealing with duplicate number plates. I need to provide evidence that I was in the Lake District. Would EXIF data from a photograph taken of me of me suffice?

It may not suffice as the date in the camera can be set as required.

The EXIF data can be changed in any Photo so that could be a tricky one good luck.

Look at credit/debit card receipts, etc. You had to buy fuel for your hire car - where, when? Hopefully somewhere in the Lake District at the same time as the other driver was committing the offences.

Also you are bound to be on a traffic camera somewhere. Whether you can get access to it and search through is another matter.

Cheers, I've got a couple of credit card receipts, camping receipt and 3 character witneses to fall back on too so hopefully should be OK.

Also, was the offending car the same make/colour, do the police have photos of the driver. One or all of these are likely to be different from your situation.
As mentioned above the EXIF data may not be any use.
Good luck
Donut

Just a thought or point for discussion.

If the EXIF data on the OPs images are not acceptable proof, then why should the data attached to the images from the traffic cameras be acceptable?

Even if that is "encrypted" it can still be falsified.

Why on earth would the police want to falsify the details from a speed camera? Do you have any idea how many photos they would have to change - and how many times people could, and would then challenge such a photo - it would be easy to prove you were elsewhere at the time the photo was allegedly made, just as Karl is now trying to do. Seems a totally pointless thing to do.

You have missed the point.

If the traffic camera data is acceptable in court then why not the data from any other digital camera.

There are cases where the authorities may "wish" to falsify data and they would only need to alter a few images. How many times have you heard that police records or notes have been falsified so why not a photograph too.

How things have changed in this country, I am not a legal expert by any means, but it use to be that it was for the police/CPS to prove guilt not the accused. They must be more aware than anyone at the level of cloning registration plates that is taking place in this country. If you say on oath, you were is the Lake District camping or whatever then that's where you were, let them prove otherwise.

Rees,
I am afraid it's not as simple as that. The police in the event of a crime having been committed and having a culprit, they do have to provide burden of proof that the alleged crime was committed by the individual accused. But just because the individual says that he or she was somewhere else during the time of the crime being committed it doesn't mean that the burden of proof falls only upon the police to provide evidence that links the accused to the crime. The accused also has the legal obligation to provide sufficient evidence and proof that he or she was wherever he or she was during the alleged crime.

What do you think lawyers rely upon in courts? This is precisely the ping pong evidence game that they shove on each other. And then the judge or juri has the unenviable task of deciding whose evidence lacks in consistency and pin the culprit. Could well be in certain cases that the evidence that the police provides falls short of convincing them even though it might be the correct one. That's how criminals get away.

This is just my take on things
Karl, you seem to have ample proof to easily provide evidence that you were miles away during the events taken place. I am sure you won't have any trouble at all getting this one off your back

Karl,

If you produce your speeding ticket from the Lake District at the time of the alleged offences in Ealing I'm sure this will be sufficient. Only joking!!




.

Any chance you took a photgraph of someone reading that day's newspapaer standing in front of Ullswater?

Amazingly when I appealed a parking ticket a few years ago, the main evidence being a photograph, I was told that they did not have to prove the image could not have been doctored as 'nobody has the software on theor computer to do it'! If it's good enough for them...

I was always led to believe that speed cameras were not digital, so as to elliminate some of the risk of doctoring.