Visual Images Provide Enough Evidence for a Crime IELTS Writing Task 2

In the case of crime scenes, the authorities greatly benefit from visual and audio evidence to find out what actually happened. The majority of public as well as private places are equipped with CCTV cameras nowadays. While some claim that these are not reliable sources for giving an honest judgment regarding the crime, others disagree. In the case of crime scenes, the authorities greatly benefit from visual and audio evidence to find out what actually happened. The majority of public as well as private places are equipped with CCTV cameras nowadays. With this equipment, you can monitor a crime as if it was happening with a human eye and get detailed information about the crime. As a result, there is no trail of suspicion about the possibility of a criminal act being committed. In addition to identifying the criminals clearly, these visual aids assist in identifying the culprits themselves.

The authenticity of such digital data is questioned by people who believe more proof is needed to make a decision. They contend that digital technology makes it easy for individuals to edit, tamper with, and alter images and videos. Such evidence is thus available for anyone to use to convict innocent people, while, on the other hand, criminals could escape. It is recommended that this source of evidence may be highly delusional and misleading. Moving forward, I personally feel that subsequent opinions should count more. A final decision about what happened should surely be based on other solid, more reliable sources of information as well.

In today's world modern technology has made life easier. Installing video recording cameras in public areas like malls, banks is a popular technique to catch criminal activity like robberies and murders. The use of these images and recordings is crucial in the investigation of crimes. For instance, it is not always possible to locate a live witness at the scene of a crime. At that point, video recording aids the police in apprehending thieves.

On the other side, while technology can be beneficial, it can also be a weapon. There are several applications at your disposal that can be used to modify the photo or video. Using these technologies, it is simple to change the evidence. One celebrity, for instance, posted a photo of herself in bed and said that one of the There are several applications at your disposal that can be used to modify the photo or video. Using these technologies, it is simple to change the evidence. For instance, one celebrity posted a photo of herself lying in bed while claiming that one of her male co-stars had physically attacked her. Investigations revealed that she had lied about her claimed male co-star. I think that additional forms of evidence should always be considered and that merely visual evidence should not be used as proof.Thus ,while photos and videos constitute unavoidable proof, they are not the sole factor in determining if a crime actually occurred or not.

The optical data is supported by those who believe they simplify the offense process. Visual materials would enable judges to better determine who is breaking the rules, especially when crimes are recorded, such as rape, hand lifting, or robbery. Photographs of the crime scene or video from the moment the criminal rapes a woman, would definitely show the offender, the tools used, or even the whole scene. It would be easier for the court to decide whether or not to convict if hidden or security cameras visualized a crime step by step.

Digital evidence may have advantages, but many people, including myself, believe they are not sufficient in all instances. The presence of digital technology does not guarantee that evidence can be obtained from images, even when crimes cannot be videotaped. Consider white-collar crimes, which include cybercrime, terrorism, and state-corporate crime and are financially motivated. As an example, we can take the example of white-collar crime. If someone is guilty, evidence such as documentary evidence and testimonials should be substituted for visually-based evidence. An image of an economic crime could never convey a sense of what the crime is about.

While audiovisual evidence is capable of providing judges with information about a crime scene.I believe they are not adequate for all crimes, since there are some that cannot be captured by cameras.