Utilization of Forensic Animation in Criminal Proceedings

Abstract

In recent years, the advancement of visual presentation techniques alongside technology has led to the increasing use of forensic animations in criminal trials in some countries. In Turkey, however, such practices have not yet been implemented in courtrooms, nor are there existing studies on this topic in the Turkish literature. Therefore, this study aims to contribute to both the academic literature and future judicial practices by employing the document analysis method to examine how forensic animations are used globally—particularly in criminal proceedings—as well as to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of such applications. It is crucial to address whether this type of evidence can be assessed objectively and in accordance with legal principles during trials. The publications reviewed in the preparation of this study generally suggest that while such evidence can serve as an auxiliary tool in legal proceedings, certain ethical and legal boundaries must be observed.

Keywords

• Forensic animation
• Forensic visualization
• Demonstrative evidence

Ceza Yargılamalarında Adli Animasyon Kullanımı

Abstract

Son yıllarda görsel sunum tekniklerinin teknolojiyle beraber gelişmesi sonucunda bu tekniklerle oluşturulan adli animasyonlar bazı ülkelerde ceza davalarında önemli bir rol oynamaya başlamıştır. Türkiye’de ise duruşma salonlarında henüz böyle bir uygulama söz konusu olmadığı gibi Türkçe literatürde de bu alanda çalışmalar mevcut değildir. Dolayısıyla bu çalışmada literatüre ve gelecekteki yargısal uygulamalara katkı sağlamak amacıyla doküman inceleme metodu kullanılarak adli animasyonların dünyada -özellikle ceza yargılamalarında- nasıl kullanıldığı, bu uygulamanın avantajları ve dezavantajları ele alınmıştır. Bu tür delillerin yargılamada objektif ve hukuka uygun şekilde değerlendirilip değerlendirilemeyeceği hususunun üzerinde durulması kritiktir. Bu çalışma hazırlanırken ele alınan yayınlar genel olarak bu tür delillerin yargılamada yardımcı bir araç olarak kullanılabileceğini fakat belirli etik ve hukuki sınırların gözetilmesi gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

• Adli animasyon
• Adli görselleştirme
• Görsel delil

References

1. Breaux, S. P. (2003). Is forensic animation right for your case? As the capabilities of computer animation grow, so does their use at trial. Here's how to determine whether this tool can enhance your case presentation. American Association for Justice – Trial, 39(12).
2. Burton, A., Schofield, D., & Goodwin, L. (2005). Gates of global perception: Forensic graphics for evidence presentation. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on Multimedia [Conference paper]. Carew, R. M., & Errickson, D. (2019). Imaging in forensic science: Five years on. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging, 16, 24–33.
3. Clifford, M., & Kinloch, K. (2008). The use of computer simulation evidence in court. Computer Law & Security Review, 24(2), 169–175.
4. Değirmenci, O. (2020). Adli bilişimde önceliklendirme (triyaj) yöntemi. Bilişim Hukuku Dergisi, 1, 47–79.
5. Fessel, F., & Roese, N. J. (2011). Hindsight bias, visual aids, and legal decision making: Timing is everything. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(4), 180–193.
6. Fowle, K., & Schofield, D. (2011). Visualising forensic data: Investigation to court. In Proceedings of the 9th Australian Digital Forensics Conference [Conference paper].
7. Galligan, A. A., Fries, C., & Melinek, J. (2017). Gunshot wound trajectory analysis using forensic animation to establish relative positions of shooter and victim. Forensic Science International, 271, e8–e13.
8. Gayret, T. (2018). Türkiye’de grafik ve animasyon sanatı tarihi (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi.

9. Göktepe, E. (2015). Geçmişten günümüze hareketli görüntü ve Türkiye’de animasyonun gelişimi (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi.
10. Hussin, N., Schofield, D., & Shalaby, T. (2004). Visualising information: Evidence analysis for computer-generated animation (CGA). In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Information Visualisation [Conference paper].
11. Lalwani, S., Raina, A., Pokle, R. C., & Dogra, T. D. (2014). Reconstruction of scene by forensic animation: Two case reports. Journal of Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine, 36(1), 104–107.
12. Liscio, E. (2009). The lesser known benefits of forensic animations. The Jury Expert, 47–55.
13. Ma, M., Zheng, H., & Lallie, H. (2010). Virtual reality and 3D animation in forensic visualization. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 55(5), 1227–1231.
14. Maksymowicz, K., Tunikowski, W., & Kościuk, J. (2014). Crime event 3D reconstruction based on incomplete or fragmentary evidence material – Case report. Forensic Science International, 242, e6–e11.
15. Maneli, M. A., & Isafiade, O. E. (2022). 3D forensic crime scene reconstruction involving immersive technology: A systematic literature review. IEEE Access, 88821–88857.
16. Michael, D., Fessel, F., Goebelbecker, J., & Roese, N. (2011). Computer animation of traffic accidents: Hindsight bias & judgments of blame. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Road Safety and Simulation [Conference paper].
17. Noond, J., Schofield, D., March, J., & Evison, M. (2002). Visualising the scene: Computer graphics and evidence presentation. Science & Justice, 42(2), 89–95.
18. Norris, G. (2014). The influence of computer generated animations on juror decision making. Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review, 11, 46–54.
19. Preim, B., & Meuschke, M. (2020). A survey of medical animation. Computers & Graphics, 90, 145–168.
20. Regan, J. M. (2005). The persuasive power of computer animation in the courtroom (Senior honor thesis). Ohio State University.
21. Rempel, E., & Burke, T. A. (2022). Technology on trial: Facilitative and prejudicial effects of computer-generated animations on jurors’ legal judgments. Psychology, Crime & Law, 29(9), 934–956.
22. Roese, N. J., & Vohs, K. D. (2012). Hindsight bias. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 411–426.
23. Roese, N. J., Fessel, F., Summerville, A., Kruger, J., & Dilich, M. A. (2006). The propensity effect when foresight trumps hindsight. Psychological Science, 17(4), 305–310.
24. Rohit, S. N., Rakshith, R., & Joseph, A. (2017). 3D face reconstruction using frontal and profile views. In Proceedings of the 7th Asia Modelling Symposium [Conference paper].
25. Sahu, A., Mandla, S. H., & Yogesh, G. (2014). Advantages of computer generated evidence: Forensic animation in Indian judiciary system. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 8(1), 136–139.
26. Sainato, V. A. (2010). Book review: C. B. Lissitzyn Forensic evidence in court: A case study approach Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2008. $45, 414 pp. ISBN:13: 978-1-59460-370-9. Criminal Justice Review, 35(3), 365–367.
27. Sainato, V. A., & Giner, J. A. (2020). Forensic technologies in the courtroom: A multi-disciplinary analysis. In Digital Forensics and Forensic Investigations (pp. 291–307).
28. Schofield, D. (2009). Graphical evidence: Forensic animations and virtual reconstructions. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 131–145.
29. Schofield, D. (2011). Playing with evidence: Using video games in the courtroom. Entertainment Computing, 2(1), 47–58.
30. Schofield, D., & Fowle, K. (2013). Technology corner: Visualising forensic data: Evidence guidelines part 1–part 2. Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 8(2), 93–114.
31. Schofield, D., & Mason, S. (2012). Using graphical technology to present evidence. In Electronic Evidence (pp. 217–253).
32. Schofield, D., Noond, J., Goodwin, L., & March, J. (2002). Interactive evidence: New ways to present accident investigation information. In Workshop on the Investigation and Reporting of Incidents and Accidents, Glasgow, UK [Conference paper].
33. Shalaby, T., Hussin, N., & Schofield, D. (2003). Forensic animation: Measuring the reliability and accuracy of computer generated animation used in the courtroom. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Information Visualization [Conference paper].
34. Sharma, M., & Kumar, S. R. (2015). Critical evaluation and contribution of virtopsy to solved crime. Research Journal of Forensic Sciences, 3(1), 1–12.
35. Smith, K. M., Rewerts, L. E., Davis, G. T., & Turner, D. J. (2020). Use of simulation and animation in forensic investigations of vessel accidents. In SNAME Maritime Convention [Conference paper].
36. Tofan, L. (2023). Dijital animasyonların öğrencilerin bilişim etiği algıları üzerindeki etkisinin belirlenmesi (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi.
37. Uysal, E. H. (2021). Fikri mülkiyet hukukunda bilgisayar oyunlarının korunması (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Ankara Sosyal Bilimler Üniversitesi.
38. Villa, C., Lynnerup, N., & Jacobsen, C. (2023). A virtual, 3D multimodal approach to victim and crime scene reconstruction. Diagnostics, 13, 2764, 1–16.