Abstract

The admissibility during criminal trials of expert evidence in relation to tracker dog behaviour and the accuracy of their identifications can be far from straightforward, in particular if sufficient bases are not established for it to be open to the decision-maker to invest trust in the accuracy of the dog’s identification of an individual or of an object associated with an individual. This article highlights the limitations of such evidence, including the risks of the dog becoming distracted and providing a false-positive identification. The article also examines what is required for tracker dog identifications to be admissible and to have probative value. It also scrutinises major lines of international judicial authority in respect of expert evidence about dog tracker identification.

Keywords

tracker dogs, identification, dog handlers, police evidence, admissibility, expert evidence, probative value