A system for the review and exclusion of inadmissible evidence and computer readable storage device

Abstract

The present application relates to the technical field of data arrangement, and relates to an illegal evidence examination and exclusion system and a computer readable storage device, wherein the system part comprises a starting non-legal evidence exclusion program, illegal evidence examination and illegal evidence exclusion; the storage device comprises one or more processors and one or more application programs configured to execute the illegal evidence examination and exclusion system. The present application has the beneficial effects that: 1. The system can be passively started according to different starting conditions, and the court trial process is accelerated; 2. The system avoids the review process of evidence files by manual non-legal evidence exclusion in the existing court trial process, and can quickly enter the judgment step of evidence legality; 3. After grasping the evidence information elements, the system is beneficial to the early result, and improves the efficiency of court trial.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the technical field of data processing, specifically to a system for reviewing and excluding illegally obtained evidence and a computer-readable storage device. Background Technology

[0002] There are many occasions for investigation and evidence collection, and the methods of investigation and evidence collection are not limited to simple visits or taking photos and samples. Therefore, evidence may be generated through legal means or illegal means. For court trials, whether the source of evidence is legal plays an important role in the trial proceedings. The prosecution and the defense may seize on these details and argue over every little thing, which may make it difficult to clarify the context of the matter and hinder the progress of the trial.

[0003] The process of identifying the wrong evidence requires initiation by both the prosecution and the defense, and it is only implemented after one party responds. Once initiated, it usually takes time to examine the generation process of all evidence one by one, which directly leads to the extension of the litigation cycle and is not conducive to the quick and efficient completion of the trial proceedings. Existing trial support methods do not provide corresponding support to enable the work of identifying the wrong evidence to be carried out quickly and effectively. Therefore, the trial process is often significantly slowed down due to the initiation of the identification procedure. In order to improve the efficiency of the trial, a system that can assist in the identification of wrong evidence is needed. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the technical deficiencies in the background art, this invention proposes an illegal evidence review and exclusion system and a computer-readable storage device, solving the aforementioned technical problems and meeting practical needs. The specific technical solution is as follows:

[0005] An illegal evidence review and exclusion system includes three modules: a module for initiating an illegal evidence exclusion procedure, a module for checking illegal evidence, and a module for excluding illegal evidence, which are connected in a linear sequence. The first two modules are connected in a controllable loop. The system also includes an exclusion thesaurus and a case sample database, which are interconnected with the above three modules through a data transmission line.

[0006] The program content of the initiated exclusion procedure module includes three initiation entry points: the entry point for the person involved in the case, the entry point for the prosecution, and the entry point for the superior of the prosecution. All three initiation entry points are directly connected to the subsequent module data, and one of them is selected as a prerequisite for the execution of the subsequent module for a single piece of evidence data. After selection, the selection of the remaining initiation entry points is closed, and the input of evidence documents is started to convert them into a single piece of evidence data. The program content of the subsequent module is executed until the end. Alternatively, if a new evidence document is input and any initiation entry point is initiated during the execution of the subsequent module, all initiation entry points are reopened, and the program content of the subsequent module is executed until the end, in parallel with the execution of the program content of the previous evidence document.

[0007] The program content of the illegal evidence screening module includes defining the basic evidence deviation factor value of the entered evidence document as 1. Then, the data of the evidence document is extracted based on the exclusion thesaurus to determine the degree of consistency between the data fields and normal fields or the degree of semantic deviation between the data fields and illegal fields. The results are then multiplied and recorded into the basic evidence deviation factor value. Next, the evidence collection and verification stage is executed, and the evidence collection process is entered as evidence data. Similarly, the data of the evidence document is extracted based on the exclusion thesaurus to determine the degree of consistency between the data fields and normal fields or the degree of semantic deviation between the data fields and illegal fields. The results are then multiplied and recorded into the basic evidence deviation factor value. Finally, the final product value is compared with the reference value of illegal evidence. If it is greater than or equal to the reference value, the evidence document is marked as illegal evidence; otherwise, it is not marked.

[0008] The program content of the module for excluding illegally obtained evidence includes marking evidence data marked as illegally obtained evidence as having no probative value, prompting the program executor to exclude it, recording the final evidence deviation factor value of the excluded evidence data in the case sample database, and correcting the reference value of the illegally obtained evidence in the form of multiplication based on the final evidence deviation factor value.

[0009] The present invention also proposes a memory comprising: one or more processors and one or more applications, wherein the one or more applications are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more applications being configured to: execute the illegal evidence review and exclusion system.

[0010] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows:

[0011] 1. The system can be passively activated according to different activation conditions and receive a rapid response. This allows both the prosecution and the defense, as well as the presiding judge, to raise requests regarding the evidence exclusion procedure, thereby quickly carrying out the evidence exclusion process and accelerating the trial process.

[0012] 2. This system avoids the manual review process of evidence documents in existing court proceedings. Instead, the computer program extracts and classifies the elements of evidence information, quickly grasps the key elements of different pieces of evidence, and thus can proceed to the step of judging the legality of the evidence as soon as possible.

[0013] 3. After grasping the elements of evidence information, the system allows both the prosecution and the defense to intervene in the evidence exclusion process at any time based on the actual situation, raising doubts without causing substantial obstacles to the process. Furthermore, the process of evidence exclusion is accelerated as more exclusion elements are added, which is conducive to obtaining results as early as possible and improving the efficiency of the trial. Attached Figure Description

[0014] Figure 1 This is an architecture diagram of the access method for the illegal evidence review and exclusion system of this invention.

[0015] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the entry point for the illegal evidence review and exclusion system program of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0016] The embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and related examples. The embodiments of the present invention are not limited to the following examples, and the present invention relates to the relevant necessary components in this technical field, which should be regarded as well-known technology in this technical field and can be known and mastered by those skilled in this technical field.

[0017] In this invention, the evidence exclusion procedure includes the following three parts: initiating the exclusion procedure, investigating illegal evidence, and excluding illegal evidence. Illegal evidence refers to an evidentiary document that was obtained by investigators through illegal evidence collection. Investigating illegal evidence involves conducting an offline investigation and verification of an evidentiary document that may have been obtained illegally. If the investigation data can verify that the evidentiary document was obtained illegally, then the corresponding evidence is determined to be illegal evidence. Excluding illegal evidence, as the name suggests, involves marking the evidentiary document that has been confirmed as illegal as having no probative value and excluding it from the evidentiary probative value review list.

[0018] Regarding the above three parts, in conjunction with the appendix Figure 1To understand the content of this invention, the illegal evidence review and exclusion system can only be initiated in two situations: either an application is made by the person involved in the case—that is, the criminal suspect, defendant, and their defense counsel or duty lawyer / litigation agent—or the prosecutor discovers the possibility of illegal evidence during the course of the case. Furthermore, to ensure that the initiation of the exclusion procedure respects the less capable party, i.e., the defense, the prosecution can only initiate the exclusion procedure in three scenarios: "deferred," "capacity review," and "proof review." In other situations, the prosecution cannot proactively request the exclusion of evidence.

[0019] In this way, even if the prosecution's evidence collection and execution capabilities are greater than the defense's, the defense can still raise requests for evidence exclusion at more stages during the actual trial proceedings. This promotes the rationalization of the evidence collection process and helps the trial proceed smoothly. All of the above is implemented based on this invention, which is mainly composed of computer programs. Therefore, it can be passively initiated according to different activation conditions and receive a rapid response. In this way, both the prosecution and the defense, as well as the presiding judge, can raise requests for evidence exclusion procedures, thereby quickly carrying out evidence exclusion and accelerating the trial process.

[0020] A. First, the process of excluding non-conforming items is started. For details on the relationship between the excluding non-conforming item startup entry and other steps, please refer to the appendix. Figure 2 Upon review, the illegal evidence review and exclusion system of this invention is designed for the illegal evidence exclusion procedure. It has an entry point that can be started to exclude illegal evidence. In order to achieve the connection between the entry point and the content, there is a "Start Illegal Evidence Exclusion Procedure" button that can be clicked in the defect review, evidence marking, review judgment, comprehensive analysis of evidence probative value, and extension / return procedure, so as to jump to the subsequent steps of evidence exclusion. Among them, defect review can be regarded as evidence admissibility review, evidence marking, evidence judgment and comprehensive analysis can be regarded as evidence probative value review, and extension / return procedure can be regarded as a form of returning to supplementary investigation and tracking, that is, a loop entry point.

[0021] Furthermore, once an objection is entered through any one of the entry points into the evidence exclusion process, all other entry points remain open. This allows for rapid intervention in the ongoing evidence exclusion process in response to objections arising at other stages. Consequently, for traditional evidence exclusion work, the system of this invention does not need to repeat the work of re-examining the legality of new evidence, but instead delegates this task to the system. At the same time, the correlation between evidence can also be quickly incorporated into the judgment, entering the comprehensive judgment in the form of weighted parameters. This provides the conditions for making an objective judgment on the overall legality and rationality of the evidence.

[0022] The evidence exclusion procedure of this invention must meet any one of the following three initiation conditions: First, it is initiated by the persons involved in the case, namely, the criminal suspect, defendant, and their defense counsel or duty lawyer or litigation agent who file a report, accusation, or complaint; second, it is initiated by the prosecution on the grounds that the investigators were found to have collected evidence by illegal means during the review and prosecution period; third, it is still initiated by the prosecution, but the difference is that after receiving the report, accusation, or complaint about the investigators' use of illegal means to collect evidence, the higher-level procuratorate transfers it to the lower level for investigation and verification.

[0023] It should be noted that, in order to improve the efficiency and accuracy of evidence review and exclusion procedures, and to meet the requirement that "both the prosecution and defense, as well as the presiding judge, can raise requests regarding the evidence exclusion procedure," once the above-mentioned process is initiated, the review of newly added evidence can still be raised at any time. Furthermore, all evidence data included in the exclusion review will be examined, relevant factors will be extracted, and the source of the evidence will be traced to comprehensively assess the credibility of that source.

[0024] B. Further integration Figure 2 As shown, the next step is to screen for illegally obtained evidence. Once initiated through the above methods, the data for the three conditions mentioned above will be entered into the evidence screening process according to the following sub-processes:

[0025] 1. When the application is submitted by the person involved in the case, the system first conducts a formal review, that is, it determines whether there is a document entitled "Application for Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence" in the evidence documents. If it does not exist, it is deemed to be formally unqualified and the process is transferred to the correction procedure. This is done by submitting a document or scanned copy in the corresponding format until it meets the formal review requirements. After the system confirms that an "Application for Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence" document has been uploaded, the conditions for initiating the process, namely "whether the applicant meets the requirements" and "whether relevant materials for illegally obtained evidence have been provided", must be met simultaneously before the next step of the review and exclusion procedure can be allowed.

[0026] 2. When initiated by the prosecution, the following two reasons will trigger the case without any restrictions, and the prosecution will not need to upload any additional documents: either the prosecution discovers that investigators have collected evidence illegally during the review and prosecution period, or the higher-level procuratorate receives a report, accusation, or complaint about investigators collecting evidence illegally, and the case is then transferred to a lower-level procuratorate for investigation and verification.

[0027] Once the exclusion procedure is initiated, the examination of defects, i.e., the examination of evidentiary competence, is essentially begun. The scope of the examination is defined by the following two steps:

[0028] Step 1: Select the evidence data that needs to be excluded. The system only provides the following types of evidence for automatic screening or manual screening by the prosecution. When screening automatically, all types are selected by default and excluded in sequence. When screening manually, the evidence data to be reviewed is selected by the prosecutor.

[0029] The types of evidence data include physical evidence, documentary evidence, witness testimony, victim statements, confessions and defenses of criminal suspects, etc.; the above evidence data content is arranged from oldest to newest according to the time sequence of evidence collection; after selecting the evidence data, the status of the evidence data will change to "doubtful", and the evidence deviation factor of the evidence data feature will be marked as "1", or it can be manually corrected.

[0030] Step 2: Set the scope of evidence review. Determine the scope of review based on the evidence documents and their categories selected in Step 1. The scope of investigation is distinguished according to the type of evidence data. Different types of evidence data determine the level of data review.

[0031] Among these, physical evidence includes whether the collection of physical evidence and documentary evidence did not comply with legal procedures, and whether this could seriously affect the proper conduct of the trial and cannot be rectified or reasonably explained; documentary evidence includes whether the collection of physical evidence and documentary evidence did not comply with legal procedures, and whether this could seriously affect the proper conduct of the trial and cannot be rectified or reasonably explained; witness testimony includes whether there were witness testimonies or victim statements obtained through illegal methods such as violence, threats, or illegal restriction of personal freedom; victim statements include whether they were repeated statements obtained through torture or coercion, and whether they were statements that should be excluded according to law due to the influence of such torture or coercion. This refers to repetitive confessions obtained through torture or coercion that should be excluded from legal considerations due to the influence of such torture or coercion. The suspect's confession and defense should be examined to determine whether they were obtained through torture or coercion that should be excluded from legal considerations due to such torture or coercion; whether they were obtained through violence or other forms of torture; whether they were obtained through threats of violence or serious harm to the suspect's or their close relatives' legal rights; and whether they were obtained through illegal restriction of personal freedom.

[0032] In the above process, the parties involved, the prosecution, and the prosecution's superiors can all intervene at any time. This means adding new content into the system, re-examining the target's evidence data, and recording the review results in the corresponding evidence deviation factor, or manually correcting it to rectify any errors that may occur in subsequent module execution. This leads to the repeated initiation of the exclusion process. In this way, the exclusion process can be continuously initiated for more evidence and more details through a few controllable and limited cycles, ensuring the compliance of the evidence.

[0033] The above process requires the system of this invention to extract keywords from the exclusion thesaurus and extract the corresponding fields from the evidence data. It then categorizes the data layer by layer according to different field categories within different evidence data, such as the title data, time data, participant data, evidence collection behavior data, and behavior result data of Evidence 1. The corresponding field information is then linked to the type of evidence data. Once the participant data subject meets the field range of any evidence data type, it is categorized under the corresponding data type. Next, based on the field range of different evidence types, a more precise secondary range is determined and finely categorized so that the next review procedure can calculate the evidence deviation factor. Simultaneously, this step also marks the source of the evidence, such as categorizing it as a common source based on the field of the location of the evidence collection behavior. The feature marks of each piece of evidence data are retained and corrected according to the evidence deviation factor in the next step.

[0034] C. Next is the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence. In this step, based on the selected evidence data and scope of review listed in the previous step, the investigation methods for each item are executed in sequence. The list of investigation methods is as follows:

[0035] 1. Request the prosecution or relevant parties to explain the legality of the evidence collection, remind them to affix the official seal of the unit, and require the signatures of the investigators or detectives to be attached, and require that this be carried out;

[0036] 2. Make a request to interrogate the criminal suspect and require the prosecution to carry it out;

[0037] 3. Make requests for questioning of witnesses, victims, or other participants in the proceedings, and require the prosecution to comply;

[0038] 4. Make a request for questioning of the investigators and require the prosecution to comply;

[0039] 5. Make a request to question those present or other persons who may have knowledge of the matter, and require the prosecution to comply;

[0040] 6. Request to hear the opinions of the appellant or accuser, and require the prosecution to comply;

[0041] 7. Request to hear the opinions of the defense counsel and duty lawyer, and request the prosecution to comply;

[0042] 8. Request the retrieval, inquiry, and copying of relevant registration forms, legal documents, experience records, and case files, and request the prosecution to comply;

[0043] 9. Request the retrieval of interrogation records, questioning records, and related audio, video, or other audio-visual materials, and request the prosecution to comply;

[0044] 10. Request an examination or assessment of the injury or medical condition, and request the prosecution or a third-party organization to carry it out;

[0045] 11. For other investigation and verification methods, evidence documents should be manually entered and supplemented or actively uploaded before execution is required.

[0046] The above investigation steps are all recorded into the evidence exclusion database through voice recording or manual uploading of data documents. The system of this invention extracts keywords from the exclusion thesaurus and compares them with the uploaded evidence data. By comparing the semantic deviation degree of the legal behavior field or the matching degree of the illegal behavior field, the correction value is added to the correction coefficient of the evidence deviation factor for the evidence data that has been entered into the evidence data, or it is manually corrected and multiplied into the evidence deviation factor of the evidence data.

[0047] In the above process, the parties involved, the prosecution, and the prosecution's superiors can all intervene at any time, that is, add new content into the system, re-examine the target's evidence data, and record the review results in the evidence deviation factor of the corresponding evidence data to correct any errors that may occur in the execution of subsequent modules.

[0048] The evidence deviation factor is implemented by automatically determining the type of evidence data. The process is as follows: The system of this invention extracts the corresponding fields in the exclusion thesaurus within the evidence data, and corrects the evidence deviation factor according to the content deviation of the field from the standard field. Since there are only two categories, illegal and legal, the value of the evidence deviation factor must be greater than 1. When the product of the evidence deviation factors of all evidence fields under the same evidence data is greater than the standard value of 1.09, it is determined that the evidence collection process of the evidence document corresponding to the evidence data has illegal factors, or it needs to be corrected manually. The value of 1.09 takes into account the dilution effect of the larger number of evidence deviation factors, that is, the product of the decimal places will inevitably become smaller. Therefore, the value of 1.09 is more appropriate. In practice, the product value of the evidence deviation factor will be adjusted downward according to the number of evidence feature factors.

[0049] The evidence data initially automatically determined by the system will not be immediately excluded from the evidence list, but will be marked as "questionable" and manually corrected by a person. When the accuracy of the evidence deviation factor reaches the actual needs of the case, the system will actively mark the evidence data as illegal evidence to be excluded and feed back the information of illegal evidence to the prosecution for subsequent improvement of the evidence collection process.

[0050] If the judgment is made by a human, the data from the automatic judgment process is used as a reference value and then evaluated by the prosecution. The judgment value is then directly correlated with the product value of the evidence deviation factor determined by the automatic judgment. After multiple correlations, the system obtains a better product value of the evidence deviation factor as a reference for future evidence exclusion procedures.

[0051] Further integration Figure 2 As shown, whether it is system judgment or manual correction, it is essentially a process that involves evidence labeling, review and judgment, and comprehensive analysis, and therefore can be regarded as the scope of evidence probative value review.

[0052] In the extension / return procedure, if new evidence or data is presented or new content is added to existing data—that is, to fill gaps in existing data rather than to present entirely new data—then the review of the evidence should be postponed. If there are too many gaps in the existing data, the case should be returned to the investigation for further investigation and the evidence should be supplemented and improved in form and substance before the review of the evidence is resumed.

[0053] D. The final step is to display the review results, enter the review conclusions, and select follow-up measures.

[0054] If the conclusion is "no", the subsequent measures will inevitably be "the evidence does not involve illegal evidence collection, and other evidence will continue to be examined". Therefore, the evidence is legal, does not need to be excluded, and will be recorded in the system.

[0055] If the conclusion is "yes," then subsequent measures require manual selection and judgment. In addition to the options, a mandatory measure will be added: "Evidence was obtained through illegal methods; therefore, this evidence must be excluded. When transferring the case file, specify that it is illegally excluded evidence according to law." Ultimately, this evidence will be removed from the evidence list. The excluded data can be stored separately in an evidence database or a similar storage device and recorded in the system. If no selection is made, a prompt will appear.

[0056] Follow-up measures can include corrective notices, notices of accountability, and written notices of investigation, all of which help to rationalize the subsequent evidence collection process. The results recorded in the system will serve as case samples and as a reference for judging the evidence deviation factor in the subsequent evidence exclusion procedure. Alternatively, manual correction can be performed to refine the execution of the subsequent evidence exclusion procedure. Once the above is completed, the review will be concluded.

[0057] To implement the illegal evidence review and exclusion system of the present invention, it is necessary to include: one or more processors and one or more application programs, wherein the one or more application programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, and the one or more application programs are configured to execute the illegal evidence review and exclusion system, thereby meeting the hardware requirements for the operation of the illegal evidence review and exclusion system of the present invention, and being effectively implemented in specific court hearings. The execution medium can be a smart device such as a computer, mobile phone, or tablet computer.

[0058] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows:

[0059] 1. The system can be passively activated according to different activation conditions and receive a rapid response. This allows both the prosecution and the defense, as well as the presiding judge, to raise requests regarding the evidence exclusion procedure, thereby quickly carrying out the evidence exclusion process and accelerating the trial process.

[0060] 2. This system avoids the manual review process of evidence documents in existing court proceedings. Instead, the computer program extracts and classifies the elements of evidence information, quickly grasps the key elements of different pieces of evidence, and thus can proceed to the step of judging the legality of the evidence as soon as possible.

[0061] 3. After grasping the elements of evidence information, the system allows both the prosecution and the defense to intervene in the evidence exclusion process at any time based on the actual situation, raising doubts without causing substantial obstacles to the process. Furthermore, the process of evidence exclusion is accelerated as more exclusion elements are added, which is conducive to obtaining results as early as possible and improving the efficiency of the trial.

[0062] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make several improvements and modifications without departing from the principle of the present invention, and these improvements and modifications should also be considered within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A system for examining and excluding illegally obtained evidence, characterized in that, The system includes the following three modules, which are linearly connected in sequence: the module for starting the exclusion procedure, the module for checking illegal evidence, and the module for excluding illegal evidence. There is a controllable loop between the first two modules. The system also includes an exclusion thesaurus and a case sample database, which are interconnected with the above three modules through data transmission lines. The program content of the initiated exclusion procedure module includes three initiation entry points: the entry point for the person involved in the case, the entry point for the prosecution, and the entry point for the superior of the prosecution. All three initiation entry points are directly connected to the subsequent module data, and one of them is selected as a prerequisite for the execution of the subsequent module for a single piece of evidence data. After selection, the selection of the remaining initiation entry points is closed, and the input of evidence documents is started to convert them into a single piece of evidence data. The program content of the subsequent module is executed until the end. Alternatively, if a new evidence document is input and any initiation entry point is initiated during the execution of the subsequent module, all initiation entry points are reopened, and the program content of the subsequent module is executed until the end, in parallel with the execution of the program content of the previous evidence document. The program content of the illegal evidence screening module includes defining the basic evidence deviation factor value of the entered evidence document as 1. Then, the data of the evidence document is extracted based on the exclusion thesaurus to determine the degree of consistency between the data fields and normal fields or the degree of semantic deviation between the data fields and illegal fields. The results are then multiplied and recorded into the basic evidence deviation factor value. Next, the evidence collection and verification stage is executed, and the evidence collection process is entered as evidence data. Similarly, the data of the evidence document is extracted based on the exclusion thesaurus to determine the degree of consistency between the data fields and normal fields or the degree of semantic deviation between the data fields and illegal fields. The results are then multiplied and recorded into the basic evidence deviation factor value. Finally, the final product value is compared with the reference value of illegal evidence. If it is greater than or equal to the reference value, the evidence document is marked as illegal evidence; otherwise, it is not marked. The program content of the module for excluding illegally obtained evidence includes marking evidence data marked as illegally obtained evidence as having no probative value, prompting the program executor to exclude it, recording the final evidence deviation factor value of the excluded evidence data in the case sample database, and correcting the reference value of the illegally obtained evidence in the form of multiplication according to the final evidence deviation factor value. An entry point for supplementing corresponding evidence data is set between the module for initiating the illegal evidence screening procedure and the module for screening illegal evidence, and a corresponding evidence data upload channel is also set.

2. The illegal evidence review and exclusion system according to claim 1, characterized in that, The system also includes a module for displaying review results. Its program includes the following: if the conclusion is that the evidence data is determined not to be illegal evidence, the subsequent measures are that the evidence is legal and does not need to be excluded, and it is recorded in the case sample database; if the conclusion is that the evidence data is determined to be illegal evidence, the evidence is removed from the evidence list based on manual or automatic judgment, and it is recorded in the case sample database.

3. The illegal evidence review and exclusion system according to claim 1, characterized in that, The reference value for the illegal evidence is initially defined as a natural number greater than 1 and not exceeding 1.

1.

4. The system for examining and excluding illegally obtained evidence according to any one of claims 1 to 3, characterized in that, All generated values ​​have a manual calibration option, which serves as a new reference value for that value in the future.

5. A memory, characterized in that, It includes: one or more processors and one or more applications, wherein the one or more applications are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, and the one or more applications are configured to: execute the illegal evidence review and exclusion system according to any one of claims 1 to 4.

Images