Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Hello, my name is***** am a qualified lawyer and I will be assisting you with your question today.
Is the time of the incident directly relevant?
Also how long have you worked there for?
Sorry my connection dropped earlier. It is possible for CCTV footage to be admissible as evidence even if the time on it is incorrect. This is just an employment setting, not a criminal court of law, where the requirements may be stricter. Employment law does not have the same strict requirements as criminal law. An employer is only required to show that the investigation they have conducted is reasonable and if there is evidence which shows that something may have happened to make an employee guilty, such as CCTV, the timing will not really be relevant unless it puts the whole allegations into question.
Let me give you an example. If the allegation is one of assault, then the important thing is that someone was assaulted and the timing is largely irrelevant. However, lets say this was a forecourt garage which required employees to lock the doors after a certain time and only serve customers through the hatch. The timing will be important when considering the allegations and the guilt of someone so it would be more likely that such evidence can be challenged.
This is your basic legal position. I have more detailed advice for you in terms of how your length of service will also affect your rights, which I wish to discuss so please take a second to leave a positive rating for the service so far (by selecting 3, 4 or 5 stars) and I can continue with that and answer any further questions you may have. Don’t worry, there is no extra cost and leaving a rating will not close the question and we can continue this discussion. Thank you
there is certainly nothing in law in relation to that. Nothing that says frame by frame footage is less acceptable than continuous footage. So the employer will have to decide what is acceptable evidence and whether it reasonable to use ot. If the footage does not provide concrete evidence then they should back it up with additional evidence, such as witnesses. Hope this clarifies?
You are welcome