It is not often that we have to testify in court regarding our photographs. And, it is even more infrequent that we are asked to testify to anything other than whether they represent what we saw. We (Newport Beach P.D.) had a case recently, however, in which our photographs were challenged. This column will focus on the content of the testimony regarding this challenge.

One of our crime scene investigators photographed injuries to an 18 month old boy. He used an ABFO scale and color chart in several of the photographs. Twenty-four hours later another photographer (a person contracted by the county, who testified for the prosecution in this case) also took photographs of the child.

During the cross examination of this photographer, questions were raised regarding the accuracy of the color in the photographs. This became an issue particularly because there were reflections on some of the color charts, causing them to appear lighter in the print.

I then testified to attempt to clarify why there was a discrepancy. I stressed in my testimony two specific issues regarding the use of the scale/color bar.

The first issue was regarding why we include a scale/color bar in some of our photographs. The important point here is that it is used as a reference and an aim point. But, it is not intended to be exactly reproduced in the prints. Because of reflections, shadows, textures, distance from the light source, the recording nature of the film, etc., the color bar cannot be reproduced exactly. But, it can, and should, be used as a reference. That is, just as the scale is a reference to size (even if it is not reproduced 1:1), the color bar is a reference to the color in the print.

The second point was similar to what we have in fingerprints, that there can be no unexplainable differences in brightness and color to claim that the print is an accurate representation of the scene or object. That is, any differences between the brightness or color of the color bar, and that of the print must be explainable as a reflection, shadow, film characteristic, etc. I believe that these two points, made in our original testimony, can help save confusion when defense attorneys try to question the accuracy of our photographs.

(Editor -- Thanks again George and we look forward to the next submission)