Abstract
Courts make use of a range of images as proof objects. This paper highlights the doctrinal assumptions that the image is a clear and perspicacious representation of a (probable) truth and that the ideal image would be the result of an acheiropoietic process. In contrast to judicially defined doctrine, evidential practices of looking at images tend to surrender to a clutter of detail and impurities. Images are rather examined and scrutinized with meticulous precision. The works of Ravit Reichman, Carlo Ginzburg, and Jacques Derrida have already done much to radicalize and re-house the concept of the detail. The argument here will be that an understanding of “detailism” as it reveals itself in the evidential practice of looking at images might help provide an alternative understanding of how the trial operates.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
