Investigation has sometimes been likened to assembling a jigsaw puzzle and each piece of evidence to an individual piece of the puzzle. However, unlike the puzzle assembler, the investigator cannot look on the cover of the box to see what the completed puzzle will look like. The investigator must carefully collect the “pieces” of the puzzle from a variety of sources and then assemble them with logic and common sense in order to see that entire picture. Although a partial picture may develop as more and more pieces are added, it is not until the final piece is placed that the investigator can clearly see the entire truth. ? This analogy also demonstrates the relationship between evidence and speculation. Assume that the person assembling the puzzle, like the investigator, does not know what the completed puzzle will look like. It is impossible for that person to look at any one piece and know what the entire picture is. If that person only has ten percent of the puzzle’s pieces and assembles them as best he or she can, it is probably still impossible to accurately guess what the picture looks like. The person may speculate, but with ninety percent of the puzzle missing, it is very likely that he or she will be wrong. The more pieces the assembler finds, the less he or she will have to speculate about the picture. Similarly, in an investigation, the investigator must gather all the evidence and assemble it with common sense before a clear picture of what happened is revealed. While an incorrect guess about what a puzzle will look like is of no consequence, the gravity of a human rights investigation requires that an investigator never speculate or guess about the ultimate facts of a case. The investigator must carefully and methodically gather as much evidence as possible in hopes that it will be sufficient to determine, without speculation, what happened. Excerpt from The Handbook of Human Rights Investigations by Dermot Groome 51 VIDEO AS EVIDENCE: ALL ABOUT EVIDENCE V 1.0 LAW FROM AN EXPERT