Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 71–89 | Cite as

New technology: opportunities and challenges for prosecutors

  • Stephen Pallaras


The promise of forensic rewards brought to prosecutors by new technology can be so dazzling that they can sometimes be blinded to the dangers that surround them. The very power of the evidence produces a temptation to manipulate it.1

With the attraction of utilising and relying upon (sometimes to the exclusion of all other evidence) the latest scientific techniques being near irresistible to investigators and prosecutors alike, the lessons learned over years of development of the laws of evidence are in danger of being cast aside. The great cost of such an approach is at the expense of the very goals of the criminal justice system itself.

The growing emergence of cases where convictions have been erroneously achieved based partly on the use of technology driven evidence, demonstrates the dilemma associated with this type of evidence. For in many such cases, the error would not have been discovered had it not been for the furtherdevelopment of technology or the...


Criminal Justice System Supra Note Experiential Knowledge Mobile Telephone Criminal Trial 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Forensic Evidence

  1. Dr Ross Vining, Director FSSA. CSI versus reality: Forensic Science in South Australia. IJS Seminar, Adelaide 16 October 2008.Google Scholar
  2. Hon Justice Michael Kirby. The urgent need for forensic excellence. (2008) 32 Crim LJ 205.Google Scholar
  3. Kidd, P. “The Graeme Thorne kidnapping: forensic evidence” at, accessed 24 October 2008.
  4. Gurdoglanyan, D. “Fingerprints used in Forensic Investigations” at, accessed 24 October 2008.

The Internet and E-Crime

  1. Choo, K. -K. R., Smith, R. G., & McCusker, R. “Future directions in technology-enabled crime: 2007-09” at, accessed 10 November 2008.
  2. Etter, B. “The forensic challenges of e-crime” at, accessed 10 November 2008.

In-Court Technology

  1. Hon Justice Robert Nicholson. (2002). The paperless court? Technology and the Courts in the Region. 12 JJA 63.Google Scholar
  2. Sutherland, T. The internet and beyond: A new order for justice? at, accessed 10 November 2008.
  3. Her Honour Judge Mary Ann Yeats, “Using PowerPoint in Charging Juries” at, accessed 11 November 2008.
  4. “Technology in Courts” at, accessed 10 November 2008.
  5. “Court Technology” at, accessed 10 November 2008.
  6. Carty, L. “Courts in online revolution” The Age 3 February 2008, at, accessed 1 November 2008.
  7. The Hon David Hunt. “Information Technology in an International Criminal Court” at, accessed 10 November 2008.


  1. Edwards, K. (2005). Ten things about DNA contamination that lawyers should know. 29 Crim LJ 71.Google Scholar
  2. “Forensic workers campaigning for better resources”, ABC News 18 June 2002 at, accessed 11 November 2008.
  3. Mugliston, P. (2008). DNA admissibility and appeals. Precedent, (85), 40–42.Google Scholar
  4. Flatman, G. “DNA: A trial lawyer’s perspective”, at, accessed 11 November 2008.
  5. R v Karger [2001] SASC 64Google Scholar


  1. Weathered, L. (2004). A question of innocence: facilitating DNA-based exonerations in Australia. Deakin Law Review 13.Google Scholar
  2. “Innocence Project” at, accessed 11 November 2008.
  3. R v Wayne Edward Butler [2001] QCA 385.Google Scholar
  4. R v Frank Alan Button [2001] QCA 133.Google Scholar

Juries and the “CSI Effect”

  1. Willing, R. ‘CIS Effect’ has juries wanting more evidence” USA Today 8 May 2008 at, accessed 23 October 2008.
  2. “Prosecutors Feel The ‘CSI Effect’”, CBS News 10 February 2005, at, accessed 23 October 2008.
  3. Thomas, A. (2006) The CSI effect: Fact or fiction. 115 The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part 70,, accessed 23 October 2008.

Prosecutors and Prosecutors’ Duties

  1. “OPP Annual Report 2006/07” at, accessed 23 October 2008.
  2. Mallard v The Queen [2005] HCA 68.Google Scholar

Novel Technologies

  1. Ferguson, G. & Berger, B. L. (2007). Recent developments in Canadian criminal law. 31 Crim LJ 369 at 383.Google Scholar
  2. “Speeding biker in YouTube video jailed” October 21 2008 at, accessed 11 November 2008.
  3. Tucker, E. Facebook a new source of evidence. Brisbane Times 22 July 2008 at, accessed 24 October 2008.
  4. “Police Use MySpace to ID Suspects” 25 March 2006 at, accessed 22 October 2008.
  5. “Small GPS Devices help prosecutors win convictions” Sydney Morning Herald 29 August 2008 at, accessed 24 October 2008.

Education and Training

  1. Schmitt, G. Online DNA training targets lawyers, judges. NIJ Journal Issue 256 at 16–18.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations