Wildlife Law Enforcement's Use of “the Money Shot”: Creating a Visual Fallacy and Generating Wider Legal and Forensic Implications

TY - JOUR

T1 - Wildlife Law Enforcement's Use of “the Money Shot”

T2 - Creating a Visual Fallacy and Generating Wider Legal and Forensic Implications

AU - Thomson, Grant S.

AU - Ogden, Rob

N1 - Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s). WIREs Forensic Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

PY - 2025/10/6

Y1 - 2025/10/6

N2 - Alarmingly, it appears that wildlife law enforcement organizations in some countries are routinely photographing suspected poachers and traffickers holding or placed alongside unprotected evidence that has been recovered during the apprehension of these individuals. Photographs are commonly taken showing clearly identifiable suspects with recovered wildlife products and other associated items that would be regarded as evidence. These images are subsequently being posted on social media platforms prior to the suspects appearing in court or being formally convicted of any offense. Not only does this practice have implications from a human rights perspective, but it also poses a risk to the validity and robustness of any subsequent forensic analysis. More broadly, these procedural practices could also inhibit future capacity and capability investments by international donors due to perceived human rights issues, poor evidence management procedures, and the inherent risks of miscarriages of justice occurring due to visual/pictorial fallacy and/or cognitive contextual priming. In this paper, we highlight the prevalence of these images through results of online research, discuss the risks of the “money shot,” and call on the wildlife law enforcement community to stop this practice.

AB - Alarmingly, it appears that wildlife law enforcement organizations in some countries are routinely photographing suspected poachers and traffickers holding or placed alongside unprotected evidence that has been recovered during the apprehension of these individuals. Photographs are commonly taken showing clearly identifiable suspects with recovered wildlife products and other associated items that would be regarded as evidence. These images are subsequently being posted on social media platforms prior to the suspects appearing in court or being formally convicted of any offense. Not only does this practice have implications from a human rights perspective, but it also poses a risk to the validity and robustness of any subsequent forensic analysis. More broadly, these procedural practices could also inhibit future capacity and capability investments by international donors due to perceived human rights issues, poor evidence management procedures, and the inherent risks of miscarriages of justice occurring due to visual/pictorial fallacy and/or cognitive contextual priming. In this paper, we highlight the prevalence of these images through results of online research, discuss the risks of the “money shot,” and call on the wildlife law enforcement community to stop this practice.

KW - evidence contamination

KW - human rights

KW - money shot photograph

KW - visual fallacy

KW - wildlife law enforcement

U2 - 10.1002/wfs2.70015

DO - 10.1002/wfs2.70015

M3 - Article

SN - 2573-9468

JO - WIREs Forensic Science

JF - WIREs Forensic Science

ER -