Photographing injuries

[pfabc123]

My partner was a victim of a domestic violating predator for over 4 years. After another foyr years on the run and moving 4 more times she decided to press charges and he is now awaiting sentence on the 29th of this month. The monster pleaded guilty. Fortunately for my partner the written medical evidence that detailed each injury was overwhelming. I believe that with technology today hospitals dental surgeries, walk in centres and GP surgeries should always photograph injuries that have occured to preserve evidence for possible future convictions. In terms of a future judge and jury deciding the fate of a violent perpatrator the old saying of "people are more likely to believe what they see rather than what they hear" i think is true. Obviously there would be consent issues on the part of the victim but i personally think it would also help the police in terms of positive policing. I also believe that the likes of Baby P would have stood a better chance of surviving along with all of the other kids that are currently being hurt. Any thoughts as to how this could be taken forward or not?

[squarebear]

Well that's absolutely unbelievable!!!!

Yesterday you were saying how no-one should have any personal details stored and now it's fine because it suits you?!

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/AB-Polls/Questi on766739.html

Make your mind up.

[pfabc123]

Squarebear
Yesterday i was simply talking about protecting your privacy. Today i am talking about personal protection and if you bother to read i did say that there would be consent issues. Please try to have a serious debate and give some kind of intelligent input. I believe cameras can be put to good use if there is consent and they are used for very good reason. ie: saving lives. Try to be a bit more sensitive.

[squarebear]

While I feel for your situation. This is still the same as recording personal data as in the google street maps example you mentioned yesterday.

What's to say that these photos wouldn't be given to advertising companies who could then target people with offers of mobility scooters etc. ?

It is an excellent idea that you mention and one I would fully back.

[pfabc123]

Hi Docspock
Good point. Yes she obviously is. Every time my partner went to hospital is was out of necessity ie broken bones etc that needed hospital treatment. The predator had her mobile phone cloned, landline calls recorded and vehicle tracked and as you probably know it would be more than her lifes worth if a predator was to find his victim documenting the evidence for a future prosecution. Thoughts?

[jno]

well, consider docspock's suggestion: take your own photos. Your camera will record the time and date.

[pfabc123]

Hi Jno
Please read answer above yours.
and please remember everyone that i said it would obviously have to be consented too.

[squarebear]

I don't believe the consenting part would be practical. What happens if the person is being bullied and dare not consent? At least if it was mandatory, they could say well I had to let them photo me.

[jno]

why would your own photos of yourself be used to sell scooters? You take them, you give them to the police if reporting the action; they aren't kept on NHS records (which may well be mishandled) but anywhere in your own home you want.

[squarebear]

Because anyone could take a picture of any injury and claim it was them. These pictures MUST be taken by someone in authority to have any credible value.

[pfabc123]

Hi Squarebear. Thanks for your comment. Fortunately the hospital staff and GP's in the past with my partner had the predator either taken away for so that the victim could have a private moment or would not allow them in the room to discuss the problem. It is at this key point that the person can privatley protect themselves and decide if they want to consent to a photo or not without the knowledge of their attacker. If there were no consent required it would probably mean that injuries would go untreated because the attackers would avoid taking the victim to hospital. Thoughts

[jno]

I don't see why - you can take a series of photos - full-length of yourself, and some closer to the actual injury. The camera's data will record that they were taken in sequence (though you could include today's paper in the shots if you wanted).

More broadly, what I'm suggesting here is the need to take action yourself rather than hoping a doctor or someone will do it for you.

[pfabc123]

Hi Jno
just ignore the scooter comment it was relating to another post regarding privacy without consent. See AB Polls privacy yes or no

[jno]

well, I didn't mean scooters in particular anyway. I just meant that if you take a photo of yourself it can be kept as private as you like. If you need it for evidence, you can produce it to the police, or otherwise just keep it to yourself.

[squarebear]

With the age of photo manipulation software, I would take any photo taken by the victim with a pinch of salt.

I still believe that the victim would be too scared to agree to a photo just in case somehow the attacker found out.

[pfabc123]

Hi Jno. In my partners case the violence and control was such that she would not have dared to do this. Remember the mosnster new every conversation that she had due to cloning her mobile and recording the landline. These people are sick and become so controlling that you dare not step out of line. I think that the photograph would need to be taken by somebody impartial and working for a medical authority in order for it to have the best chance of standing up in court. Like Squarebear said people could be wrongly implicated.

[pfabc123]

Hi Squarebear. I agree that the image can easily be manipulated if taken yourself. This will easily be defended against by a half decent lawer. Good point. All the more reason to have someone in mediacl authority to take and store the picture if consented to.

[squarebear]

Yes, I agree with you there.