Evidence of data extracted from mobile phones using forensic software such as XRY or Cellebrite requires proof from a suitably qualified person that the extraction process produces accurate results and that the downloading was properly carried out on the particular occasion; the operator's inability to explain how the software works may be fatal to admissibility. A prosecution may be permitted to reopen its case to clarify an ambiguity inadvertently created by its own evidence, where the circumstances are exceptional and the reopening does not prejudice the accused's fair trial. The proviso may be applied where the wrongly admitted evidence (text messages) is excluded from consideration but the remaining circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.