Witness demeanour and appearance

In addition, in traficking cases where “juju” was used, the victims often have speciic scarring on their bodies from the “juju” ritual. This appears in Anthony Harrison United Kingdom 191 where the victims had scars on particular parts of their bodies which corre- sponded to the scars arising from “juju” rituals. The absence of “real evidence” when it would be expected Sometimes the lack of certain forms of “real evidence” when one would expect them to appear, can contribute to prove traficking and allied crimes. For example, if in a brothel, there are no signs of condoms, it may mean that the women are not permitted to ask clients to use them, thus contributing to prove their exploitation. Sources of “real evidence” The term “real evidence” is used to describe objects including people and animals submitted in evidence for the purpose of gathering impressions about their properties, rather than their content which would be classiied as testimonial or documentary evidence. “Real evidence” can be an important source of evidence in traficking in persons cases. “Real evidence” may assume many forms, including, but not limited to: • Photographs e.g. of a victim’s appearance, of a situation concerning the defendantvictim or of the living or working conditions of the victim • Video-recordings e.g. of sexual exploitation • Tools to hurt someone, such as electric shockers • Chains and locks which denote imprisonment • Sex toys and condoms • Fingerprints, biological traces and traces of objects • Marked money • Unexplained large amounts of cash • Behaviour during testimony e.g. crying, confusion, lack of emotion, evasiveness • Appearance of witness e.g. tattoos which denote ownership of the perpetrator over the victim

2.9 Evidence gathered by special investigative techniques

Some jurisdictions seek supporting evidence by means of special investigative techniques such as “stings” or entrapment initiatives; wiretapping; or surveillance of premises or persons. The evidence gathered in these ways can yield testimonial, documentary or “real” evidence. Caution must be exercised in learning from these cases, as different jurisdictions have dis- parate rules about the admissibility of evidence obtained by using such techniques. An example of an undercover operation which yielded “real evidence” can be found in Maycabalong Philippines, 192 in which police, informed of possible sexual exploitation of women by two men, conducted an undercover operation after a three-day long surveillance. During this operation, a police oficer posed as a customer and dusted the money to be paid 191 See Index of all cases. 192 See Index of all cases. with ultraviolet powder. The defendants were convicted of traficking in persons for prostitu- tion and pornography. Similarly, in Kalpana Ranganath Galphade India, 193 two citizens posed as customers in a brothel in order to further a police raid. One of these bogus customers subsequently testiied and was termed by the court “a star witness”. The defendant was convicted of a range of prostitution and sexual exploitation charges on the background of victimization of minor girls, some of whom were forced into prostitution. Another special investigative technique which can yield evidence is wiretapping. This technique is not permitted in all jurisdictions and may be resource sensitive. Thus, some jurisdictions such as Bolivia and the Philippines prohibit wiretapping under any circumstances, whereas other jurisdictions such as Egypt, Germany and Israel allow it, if authorized by a judge. The interception of telecommunications was also used in the cases of DPP v. Ho and Ho Australia 194 and DPP v. Ho and Leech Australia. 195 In these trials evidence was sub- mitted of the defendants speaking to each other over the telephone about the victims as “stock”. This proved devastating to the defence case, which was that the defendants’ relationship with the victims was merely one of employeremployee, rather than slavery. This evidence served as part of the basis for conviction on a series of slavery offences. In K.P.405 Serbia, 196 the evidence obtained from wiretapping included conversations of the defendants, who formed part of a group of criminals organized in Italy, Montenegro, Serbia and the Ukraine for the purpose of proiting from traficking in persons for sexual exploitation. Under Serbian law, in cases where organized crime is involved, the special investigative techniques set out in article 20 of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime are allowed. In this case, wiretapping provided substantial evidence to support a conviction of traficking in persons. In particular, the wiretapping proved that the traficking in persons was planned over a long period of time; that the defendants discussed how much would be paid for a particular woman; and that they rated the women’s appearance on a numerical scale. This led the court to conclude that the young Ukrainian female victims were treated like objects. The wiretapping evidence was particularly crucial in this case because the intended exploitation had not yet occurred. In this regard, the wiretapping provided signiicant evidence to prove the purpose of the intended exploitation. In Saban Israel, 197 a large network was involved in traficking women for prostitution over a period of nine years, whereby young women from former Soviet Union Republics were traficked to Cyprus and Israel. Several members of the network, namely the driver, the “pimp” and the brothel keeper, claimed that they were involved only in “technical” aspects of the operation and did not know that the women were traficked. Yet they were convicted of human traficking. The court relied on various pieces of evidence including wiretapping 193 See Index of all cases. 194 DPP v. Ho and Anor [2009], VSC 437, Australia, The case is available in the UNODC Human Traficking Case Law Database UNODC Case No. AUS007. 195 DPP v. Ho and Leech [2009] VSC 495, Australia. The case is available in the UNODC Human Traficking Case Law Database UNODC Case No. AUS008. 196 See Index of all cases. 197 Criminal Case 1016-09, State of Israel v. Saban et al 1212012, appealed in Criminal Appeals 4031, 4881, 4916, 4920, 494512, Saban et al v. State of Israel, Israel. and recorded meetings with a perpetrator who turned State’s evidence. This evidence demonstrated the defendants’ knowledge of the traficking operation. The court concluded that the defendants were all part of the traficking operation. In I. Austria, 198 the defendant was convicted of human traficking under aggravating cir- cumstances and other charges for buying and selling at least ive women from Bulgaria to be exploited in prostitution. Wiretapped telephone conversations between the defendant and his victims contributed to the convictions by: corroborating statements made by the victims about the chronology of events, the type of threats made, the control exercised over them and the demands made by the defendant; establishing the defendant’s links to other criminals and the ongoing and his long standing involvement in traficking women to Austria for the purpose of exploiting them in prostitution; contradicting the defendant’s false statements in court; and supplementing statements where the defendant claimed he could not remember. Wiretapping can also lead to defendants’ confessions. Thus in Adrian Olariu et al Germany, 199 wiretapped conversations which supported the victim’s version led to a confes- sion by the defendant. All the defendants were convicted of traficking for sexual exploitation of minors. The value of wiretapping: practitioners’ views Prosecutors who have experience with wiretapping enumerated the following advantages: • It can reveal the chain of perpetrators and their respective roles—instead of limiting charges to the end exploiter. • It can uncover substantive evidence to add to the mosaic of evidence, such as derogatory language used, the level of brutality applied and the transnational nature of the offence. • It can reveal the purpose of exploitation, particularly important in cases where the exploitation has not yet transpired. • It can lead to confessions. • It can support victim testimony or under certain circumstances even make it unnecessary. • It can contradict defendants’ assertions. • It can help to prove criminal intent. 198 See Index of all cases. 199 High Court of Berlin, 504 Kls 1412 251 Js 101412, Verdict of 20 December 2013, Germany.