From the Tampa Bay On-Line:
"... Although a useful tool in the digital age, there are still caveats associated with surveillance footage when it comes to courtroom testimony.
Videos can be misleading if they're shown without context, said Michael Sinacore, the felony bureau chief of the Hillsborough State Attorney's Office. Other than bank robberies, most clips used in trials show part of the story, he said. Usually, there's no sound in surveillance footage and an audio soundtrack can fill in gaps.
Yet video has helped prosecutors confirm the speed of cars in vehicular homicide cases and prove that people who testified they were victims of a robbery were actually the perpetrators, he said.
"You always have to look at video with a certain level of caution," Sinacore said. "But it could still be a valuable piece of evidence ..."
Click here to read the complete the story.
Enjoy.
This blog is no longer active and is maintained for archival purposes. It served as a resource and platform for sharing insights into forensic multimedia and digital forensics. Whilst the content remains accessible for historical reference, please note that methods, tools, and perspectives may have evolved since publication. For my current thoughts, writings, and projects, visit AutSide.Substack.com. Thank you for visiting and exploring this archive.
Featured Post
Welcome to the Forensic Multimedia Analysis blog (formerly the Forensic Photoshop blog). With the latest developments in the analysis of m...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment