Eyewitness Testimony vs Digital Forensic Evidence

Abstract

Eyewitness testimony and digital forensic evidence are two major sources of proof used in modern criminal justice systems. While eyewitness accounts are rooted in human perception and memory recall, digital evidence is derived from computational data sources such as metadata logs, surveillance footage, and device forensics. This paper compares the reliability, vulnerabilities, and ethical limitations of each evidence type. A conceptual model, the Hybrid Evidentiary Verification Framework (HEVF), is introduced to illustrate how courts can evaluate convergence between human testimony and digital traces. Findings suggest that eyewitness accounts are highly susceptible to memory distortion, suggestibility, and cognitive bias, whereas digital evidence, though perceived as objective, is vulnerable to tampering, algorithmic error, and contextual misinterpretation. Integrating both forms of evidence leads to more accurate judicial outcomes.