3 ms·
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1001 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1001 Federal Rule of Evidence 1001 (e): A “duplicate” means a counte
by OldHand2018 5y ago
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1001 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1001
Federal Rule of Evidence 1001 (e): A “duplicate” means a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic, or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1002 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1002
Federal Rule of Evidence 1002: An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1003 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1003
Federal Rule of Evidence 1003: A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original’s authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate.
The defense argued that a zoomed-in video is not a duplicate under the rules because the zooming algorithm changed the pixels. If that is true, then the zoomed-in video can't be used as evidence and you have to use the original. If it is false, then the zoomed-in video can be used as evidence.
That's a real argument and the prosecution was unprepared to defend it. If you are going to blame someone (hint hint), don't blame the judge.
- giantg2 5y agoAgree. One other thing to point out though, this is a state trial, so I assume there could be minor differences compared to these federal rules.
- OldHand2018 5y agoOh yes, you are correct. But seriously, pinch-to-zoom has been around for 10 years now, right? This honestly cannot be the first time it's "reproduction accuracy" has been questioned, can it??? The judge gave him half an hour to go do some legal searching, and he came up with nothing??? Milwaukee is just up the road and has a university with a pretty decent CS department. Nobody there was willing to say "yeah, the interpolation algorithm will make an accurate reproduction"? If the prosecution said "I have a professor willing to testify, can we have a delay?" I'm pretty sure the judge would have said yes. Or at least said no so there is something to appeal later on.
- giantg2 5y agoIt is a little odd there's no prior evaluation. Although, in my experience things like this get glossed over. A question I didn't see talked about is did they think zooming in would help? My experience has generally been that digital zoom doesn't really help in most cases, especially for distant shots (which if looked like they were viewing).