Evidence gathered by a judicial police officer through identity-hidden or identity-disguised investigation of a digital sex crime, when may it be used at all?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
The practice file to read here is the record showing that the person who collected the evidence was a judicial police officer acting under the provisions on identity-hidden and identity-disguised investigation, a paper identifying the digital sex crime that was the target of that investigation, and any application or decision that reveals what the evidence is now being used for.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading treats the bar as starting from the collection: evidence and materials gathered by a judicial police officer under the identity-hidden or identity-disguised investigation provisions cannot be used at all unless the use falls within one of the listed cases, covering investigation, prosecution or prevention of the target digital sex crime or a related crime, a disciplinary proceeding arising from that crime, a damages claim brought by the person the collection targeted, or use under another statute.
Another reading notes that the list covers use, not the earlier gathering itself, and it leaves open what amounts to a related crime or a use under another statute, so a file that names neither the target crime nor the statute said to permit the use shows none of the conditions the provision attaches.
Your judgment
If the evidence is offered in a proceeding about a different crime, what in the file would show it is related to the crime that was the target of the investigation?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this card again if the provision is amended to add or remove a permitted use, or if a court decision explains when a crime counts as related to the target digital sex crime.