Once criminal charges are laid against an accused person, the police investigation behind the case can seem like the entire story. The officers involved may have interviewed potential witnesses, collected physical and digital evidence, reviewed surveillance footage, and prepared reports based on their findings. Much of this material will ultimately form part of the disclosure provided to the defence.
However, a police investigation represents only one examination of the events in question. Important witnesses may never have been interviewed. Hours of surveillance footage may have been overlooked. Timelines may contain gaps, and digital evidence may be presented without its full context. Even seemingly minor pieces of information can become significant once the defence takes a closer look at the case.
This is where the work of criminal defence lawyers and private investigators can intersect.
As a criminal lawyer based in Brampton, Ontario, with A. Dhillon Law, Akash Dhillon examines the evidence disclosed by the Crown from a legal perspective and considers how it relates to the specific elements of the offence the prosecution must prove.
Michael Porter, a senior private investigator with Haywood Hunt & Associates Inc. in Toronto, Ontario, approaches evidence from an investigative perspective. His work may involve identifying information that supports, contradicts, or adds context to what has already been disclosed.
Together, these perspectives highlight an important aspect of criminal investigations: what has not yet been found can sometimes be just as important as what has.
Practical Limitations of Police Investigations
Police investigators are responsible for gathering evidence and determining whether there are reasonable grounds to lay charges. Depending on the nature and complexity of a case, an investigation may involve witness interviews, surveillance footage, electronic communications, photographs, forensic evidence, and other records.
Investigations also operate within practical limits. Police may have limited time and resources, and investigators must make decisions about which leads to pursue, which evidence appears most relevant, and which witnesses need to be contacted.
Once charges have been laid, defence counsel approaches the evidence from a different perspective. The question becomes whether the evidence is capable of proving each element of the alleged offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
That difference in approach can reveal areas that deserve closer examination.
A witness mentioned in a police statement may never have been contacted. A nearby business may have security cameras that captured part of the incident. Text messages provided to police may begin halfway through a conversation. A timeline may rely heavily on one person’s recollection.
None of these issues necessarily causes a case to collapse. Each one, however, can provide a legitimate reason for further investigation.
Filling Gaps in the Factual Record
A private investigator retained by defence counsel is not necessarily conducting a second police investigation in the traditional sense. The investigator’s role is generally much narrower and focused on specific factual questions.
Their work may include locating and interviewing witnesses, documenting a scene, obtaining publicly available records, identifying potential sources of surveillance footage, or examining discrepancies in a timeline.
Michael Porter, senior private investigator with Haywood Hunt & Associates Inc., works in a field where careful documentation is particularly important. In a criminal proceeding, independently gathered information should be recorded in a way that allows counsel to understand where it came from, when it was obtained, and how it relates to information already contained in disclosure.
Sometimes, a seemingly small piece of information can become significant.
Consider a charge arising from an altercation outside a restaurant. Police may have obtained footage from one camera that shows only part of what happened. An investigator may discover that another business across the street has a camera offering a different angle.
That footage could support the original account, contradict it, or simply provide additional context.
The value lies in developing a more complete factual picture rather than trying to establish a preferred version of events.
Investigating Witness Testimony
Human memory is imperfect.
People may remember the same event differently depending on where they were standing, what they could see, how much time passed before they were interviewed, and what happened immediately before or after the incident.
Statements can also change over time.
Defence counsel will often compare witness accounts with other available evidence. Does the timeline match the video footage? Do text messages support the sequence of events described? Does another witness remember the same details?
Private investigators can assist by locating witnesses who were identified but never interviewed, or by finding individuals whose involvement only became apparent after the disclosure was reviewed.
Care is particularly important when speaking with witnesses. Investigators should document what a witness actually says without attempting to influence their recollection or steer them toward a particular interpretation of events.
The objective is to gather accurate information, not to manufacture favourable evidence.
Challenges Presented by Digital Evidence
Modern criminal cases increasingly involve information generated by mobile phones, vehicles, security systems, digital cameras, and social media platforms.
Text messages, social media conversations, photographs, location data, and surveillance footage can all become relevant to a criminal proceeding.
However, digital evidence can be misleading when viewed in isolation.
A screenshot may show several messages while leaving out the conversation that came before them. A video may capture part of an incident without showing what happened several minutes earlier. A timestamp may also raise questions about device settings, time zones, or how the material was recorded.
This is another area where legal and investigative perspectives can complement one another.
An investigator may focus on locating and preserving additional material. Defence counsel can then assess whether that evidence is relevant, admissible, and capable of affecting the Crown’s case.
There is also a practical concern: digital evidence can disappear quickly.
Businesses routinely overwrite security footage. Social media posts can be deleted. Accounts can be changed or removed. Witnesses may replace their phones or lose access to messages.
When potentially useful evidence has been identified, preserving it as early as possible can be important.
Context Matters When Evaluating Digital Evidence
One of the main differences between examining an isolated piece of evidence and reviewing the broader circumstances of a case is context.
A single message may appear threatening until the surrounding conversation is reviewed. An eyewitness account may seem convincing until video shows that the person’s view was obstructed. A timeline may appear consistent until objective records establish that an event occurred at a different time.
This does not mean independent evidence will always favour the accused.
Additional evidence may strengthen the prosecution’s version of events. That information can still be valuable because defence counsel needs a realistic understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the Crown’s case when advising a client.
A Fuller Picture Can Support Better Representation
Criminal cases are rarely limited to police reports and witness statements.
Crown disclosure provides defence counsel with the evidence gathered as part of the prosecution’s case, but reviewing that material can raise new questions. Those questions may lead to additional witnesses, documents, surveillance footage, digital records, or other evidence.
The roles of criminal lawyers and private investigators are distinct, but they can overlap when a case requires more detailed fact-finding.
Looking beyond the police file can help defence counsel develop a more complete understanding of what happened, identify gaps or inconsistencies in the evidence, and provide advice based on the fullest factual picture available.
