In my long-standing career as an expert in identifying living individuals from images, I have repeatedly experienced the immense importance of precise identification from photographic and video evidence. However, this task is becoming increasingly complex. In a world where crime and security-relevant incidents are steadily increasing, courts, investigative authorities, and experts face the great challenge of identifying individuals from often blurry, shaky, or poorly lit footage undoubtedly. Yet, despite these difficulties, the quality and resolution of the material presented to us improves significantly from year to year.
Read more
Posts
Given the legal questions we often face, especially regarding the quantification of “very likely” in percentages, I would like to explain why I, as an expert, have decided to avoid such numerical assessments. The probability of identity or non-identity is deliberately formulated as a verbal predicate because biostatistical calculations are problematic. There is a lack of sufficiently extensive and validated databases that consider various ethnic origins and age groups. Moreover, the reference images were not created under standardized conditions. Therefore, the “actual” expression of features is often not discernible, and calculations based on the “apparent” expression could lead to erroneous conclusions.