From the CCTV User Group's CCTV Image Magazine:
"IT SEEMS AS IF CCTV is hardly ever out of the headlines. Stories range from the positive (eg. “Man convicted on CCTV evidence”) and the hopeful (eg. “Police release CCTV images of suspect”) to the doubtful (eg. “Why weren’t CCTV cameras working?”) and the negative (eg. “Thousands of CCTV cameras cost millions”).
Meanwhile, the story that arguably kickstarted the CCTV revolu- tion in the UK is back in the news, as Jon Venables – who along with Robert Thompson abducted, tortured and murdered Jamie Bulger in February 1993 – has been recalled to prison for an unspecified violation of his licence of release.The grainy CCTV images of the toddler Jamie being led away by two children (aged 10) is widely credited with the surge in public support for CCTV.
And now CCTV appears to have become a political football, with the Prime Minister Gordon Brown calling out the Conservative Party leader David Cameron for his lack of public support for CCTV.
According to an article on Bloomberg, at a major speech on law and order in Reading recently, the Prime Minister challenged the Conservative Party’s view that British society is “broken” and sought to use its opposition to closed-circuit television cameras and a DNA database as evidence that the party is made up of privileged people out of touch with the majority of the population.
“I know some people think CCTV is excessive but they don’t have to take the night bus home,” Brown said in his speech in Reading, west of London. “I know the hard-working majority will never be able to live in a gated community or hire a private security firm.”
It is, according to Simon Hoggart in the Guardian, part of a wider attempt to repaint Labour as the “hanging and flogging party, whereas the Tories are a bunch of bleeding-heart, Guardian-reading milquetoasts”.
Read the rest of this interesting article by clicking here.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Monday, April 5, 2010
How safe is your storage?
From CCTV Image Magazine:
"Video storage is like a vault: you expect your data to be safe inside but circumstances – and worse yet – system design can conspire against you, leaving you sitting high and dry when you need your footage most. We take a look at some of the technologies and ask how safe it is.
There's nothing simple about digital storage. The manufacturer, installer or specifier who tells you that you don’t need to worry about storage either doesn’t under- stand what they’re talking about or is trying to keep you from asking too many awkward questions.
That’s the message that we got from speak- ing to three manufacturers of storage systems: Veracity UK Ltd, Promise Technology Inc. and Intransa Inc. These three companies specialise in digital storage for video surveil- lance.
According to them, storing video surveillance data is a unique challenge, unlike any other IT storage requirement. To appreciate the challenges, first you have to understand a little bit about storage technology.
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
"Video storage is like a vault: you expect your data to be safe inside but circumstances – and worse yet – system design can conspire against you, leaving you sitting high and dry when you need your footage most. We take a look at some of the technologies and ask how safe it is.
There's nothing simple about digital storage. The manufacturer, installer or specifier who tells you that you don’t need to worry about storage either doesn’t under- stand what they’re talking about or is trying to keep you from asking too many awkward questions.
That’s the message that we got from speak- ing to three manufacturers of storage systems: Veracity UK Ltd, Promise Technology Inc. and Intransa Inc. These three companies specialise in digital storage for video surveil- lance.
According to them, storing video surveillance data is a unique challenge, unlike any other IT storage requirement. To appreciate the challenges, first you have to understand a little bit about storage technology.
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Using CCTV as a defensive measure
From CCTV Image:
"It is suggested that approximately 30 per cent or more of whiplash injuries are either fraudulent or exaggerated. Excellent examples of the above are explained in detail from recent court cases.
Billows v Riley, heard in the Liverpool County Court: The Claimant was a passenger on a bus when it was struck by a small vehicle driven by the Defendant. The Defendant was uninjured and there was little damage to the vehicles.
Medical and engineering evidence could have been obtained; however the key issue in reality was the CCTV evidence. While this showed some occupancy displacement there was considerable doubt as to whether this was sufficient to cause injury.
Despite this, a claim was presented by a passenger – a postman with a pre-existing back condition, which potentially made him more susceptible to injury.
Nevertheless, the claim was defended as the CCTV indicated that the Claimant had not been displaced as much as was suggested to the medical expert during the medical examination and was insuffi- cient to cause the injury alleged. The Court agreed, and accordingly the claim was dismissed with costs.
In another case, a man from Northern Ireland admitted that he had made a fraudulent claim for personal injury compensation following a bus crash.
The claimant said that he was injured in the bus crash, but after viewing CCTV evidence it was discovered he was not even on board the bus at the time of the crash.
In court, the 58-year-old man admitted that he wasn’t on the bus at the time of the accident. The bus company was successful in defending itself against the attempt to gain injury compensation and the man withdrew his claim for personal injury compensation, but the bus company wanted to prosecute him for his fraudulent attempts to extort money from them. As a result of the ruling, he had to pay the legal bill to the company, which amounted to £2,700.
Click here for the whole article - Benefits of Mobile CCTV.
Enjoy.
"It is suggested that approximately 30 per cent or more of whiplash injuries are either fraudulent or exaggerated. Excellent examples of the above are explained in detail from recent court cases.
Billows v Riley, heard in the Liverpool County Court: The Claimant was a passenger on a bus when it was struck by a small vehicle driven by the Defendant. The Defendant was uninjured and there was little damage to the vehicles.
Medical and engineering evidence could have been obtained; however the key issue in reality was the CCTV evidence. While this showed some occupancy displacement there was considerable doubt as to whether this was sufficient to cause injury.
Despite this, a claim was presented by a passenger – a postman with a pre-existing back condition, which potentially made him more susceptible to injury.
Nevertheless, the claim was defended as the CCTV indicated that the Claimant had not been displaced as much as was suggested to the medical expert during the medical examination and was insuffi- cient to cause the injury alleged. The Court agreed, and accordingly the claim was dismissed with costs.
In another case, a man from Northern Ireland admitted that he had made a fraudulent claim for personal injury compensation following a bus crash.
The claimant said that he was injured in the bus crash, but after viewing CCTV evidence it was discovered he was not even on board the bus at the time of the crash.
In court, the 58-year-old man admitted that he wasn’t on the bus at the time of the accident. The bus company was successful in defending itself against the attempt to gain injury compensation and the man withdrew his claim for personal injury compensation, but the bus company wanted to prosecute him for his fraudulent attempts to extort money from them. As a result of the ruling, he had to pay the legal bill to the company, which amounted to £2,700.
Click here for the whole article - Benefits of Mobile CCTV.
Enjoy.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
The importance of video in trial
HEURING v. MEIJER, INC.
"... Sometime after appellee's release from the hospital it was discovered that there was a videotape of the incident as well as a co-worker and a customer who had witnessed appellee's fall. Dr. Brue did not consider the videotape or any statements from the witnesses in reaching his medical opinion ..."
"... While appellant's reliance on Waller is not incorrect, appellant fails to prove that appellee fell because of a syncopal episode unrelated to appellee's employment. The only witness offering the syncopal episode explanation for appellee's fall is Dr. Brue who did not base his conclusion on the indisputable video evidence or the testimony of witnesses with first-hand knowledge of the incident. The stronger evidence is the opinion of the customer who witnessed the event and Dr. Dunne, who formed her opinion after reviewing the video of the fall. These parties agree, and the video is consistent in showing, that appellee tripped over a step stool while walking towards the counter. The circumstances revealed in the stronger evidence fall in favor of compensation ..."
"... Moreover, had appellant successfully proven that appellee's fall was caused by some idiopathic condition, appellant would still need to defeat the exception laid out in Indus. Comm. v. Nelson (1933), 127 Ohio St. 41. In Nelson the Supreme Court of Ohio set forth an exception which allows participation in the Workers' Compensation Fund despite an idiopathic condition "whenever conditions attached to the place of employment or otherwise incident to the employment are factors in" the resultant injury. Id. at 46. In Nelson, a welder experienced an epileptic seizure and fell, striking his head on the corner of the spot welding machine where he was working. Id. at 42. In our case, the video showed and appellee's co-worker testified that appellee fell into and hit his head on some cabinets ..."
Clear evidence of the value of video evidence at trial: "... who formed her opinion after reviewing the video of the fall. These parties agree, and the video is consistent in showing, that appellee tripped over a step stool while walking towards the counter. The circumstances revealed in the stronger evidence fall in favor of compensation ..."
Enjoy.
"... Sometime after appellee's release from the hospital it was discovered that there was a videotape of the incident as well as a co-worker and a customer who had witnessed appellee's fall. Dr. Brue did not consider the videotape or any statements from the witnesses in reaching his medical opinion ..."
"... While appellant's reliance on Waller is not incorrect, appellant fails to prove that appellee fell because of a syncopal episode unrelated to appellee's employment. The only witness offering the syncopal episode explanation for appellee's fall is Dr. Brue who did not base his conclusion on the indisputable video evidence or the testimony of witnesses with first-hand knowledge of the incident. The stronger evidence is the opinion of the customer who witnessed the event and Dr. Dunne, who formed her opinion after reviewing the video of the fall. These parties agree, and the video is consistent in showing, that appellee tripped over a step stool while walking towards the counter. The circumstances revealed in the stronger evidence fall in favor of compensation ..."
"... Moreover, had appellant successfully proven that appellee's fall was caused by some idiopathic condition, appellant would still need to defeat the exception laid out in Indus. Comm. v. Nelson (1933), 127 Ohio St. 41. In Nelson the Supreme Court of Ohio set forth an exception which allows participation in the Workers' Compensation Fund despite an idiopathic condition "whenever conditions attached to the place of employment or otherwise incident to the employment are factors in" the resultant injury. Id. at 46. In Nelson, a welder experienced an epileptic seizure and fell, striking his head on the corner of the spot welding machine where he was working. Id. at 42. In our case, the video showed and appellee's co-worker testified that appellee fell into and hit his head on some cabinets ..."
Clear evidence of the value of video evidence at trial: "... who formed her opinion after reviewing the video of the fall. These parties agree, and the video is consistent in showing, that appellee tripped over a step stool while walking towards the counter. The circumstances revealed in the stronger evidence fall in favor of compensation ..."
Enjoy.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Judge urges skepticism on forensic evidence
From the Boston Globe:
"“CSI’’ may make for gripping television, but US District Court Judge Nancy Gertner says forensic evidence isn’t everything it’s cracked up to be.
In a move that some legal scholars said may be the first by a federal judge, Gertner has ordered defense lawyers and prosecutors not to assume that evidence routinely accepted in the courts for decades is reliable. Defense lawyers, she wrote, should vigorously challenge fingerprints, bullet identification, handwriting, and other trace evidence, and prosecutors should be prepared to show it is valid.
“In the past, the admissibility of this kind of evidence was effectively presumed, largely because of its pedigree — the fact that it had been admitted for decades,’’ Gertner wrote in a March 8 order. “As such, counsel rarely challenged it, and if it were challenged, it was rarely excluded or limited.’’
That needs to change, she said. A critique last year by the National Academy of Sciences, she noted, concluded that forensic evidence used to convict thousands of defendants for nearly a century is hardly the infallible proof of police procedurals on television. Too often, the study found, it is the product of sloppy practices that should be improved and standardized.
Spurred by the report and criminal cases she has presided over, Gertner wrote that the validity of such evidence “ought not to be presumed’’ and that defense attorneys should contest it at pretrial hearings, or explain why they do not. She will allow the evidence to go before a jury only if it meets sound scientific principles.
Defense lawyers and advocates for people who have been wrongly convicted of crimes welcomed Gertner’s order."
Read the rest of the story by clicking here.
Enjoy.
"“CSI’’ may make for gripping television, but US District Court Judge Nancy Gertner says forensic evidence isn’t everything it’s cracked up to be.
In a move that some legal scholars said may be the first by a federal judge, Gertner has ordered defense lawyers and prosecutors not to assume that evidence routinely accepted in the courts for decades is reliable. Defense lawyers, she wrote, should vigorously challenge fingerprints, bullet identification, handwriting, and other trace evidence, and prosecutors should be prepared to show it is valid.
“In the past, the admissibility of this kind of evidence was effectively presumed, largely because of its pedigree — the fact that it had been admitted for decades,’’ Gertner wrote in a March 8 order. “As such, counsel rarely challenged it, and if it were challenged, it was rarely excluded or limited.’’
That needs to change, she said. A critique last year by the National Academy of Sciences, she noted, concluded that forensic evidence used to convict thousands of defendants for nearly a century is hardly the infallible proof of police procedurals on television. Too often, the study found, it is the product of sloppy practices that should be improved and standardized.
Spurred by the report and criminal cases she has presided over, Gertner wrote that the validity of such evidence “ought not to be presumed’’ and that defense attorneys should contest it at pretrial hearings, or explain why they do not. She will allow the evidence to go before a jury only if it meets sound scientific principles.
Defense lawyers and advocates for people who have been wrongly convicted of crimes welcomed Gertner’s order."
Read the rest of the story by clicking here.
Enjoy.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Using GPS to get out of a speeding ticket?
From CNET:
An Ohio man is trying to beat a speeding ticket through an unusual defense: claiming that his cell phone's GPS records show he was driving under the speed limit.
Jason Barnes received two points on his license and a $35 fine for allegedly driving 84 mph in a 65 mph portion of Interstate 75 in March 2009. But he says that his employer uses GPS tracking on his Verizon Wireless phone to detect speed limit violations--and those logs prove he wasn't speeding.
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
An Ohio man is trying to beat a speeding ticket through an unusual defense: claiming that his cell phone's GPS records show he was driving under the speed limit.
Jason Barnes received two points on his license and a $35 fine for allegedly driving 84 mph in a 65 mph portion of Interstate 75 in March 2009. But he says that his employer uses GPS tracking on his Verizon Wireless phone to detect speed limit violations--and those logs prove he wasn't speeding.
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Police: Surveillance footage becomes key tool in solving crimes
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.
"... 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.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Photoshop to the rescue
"How Photoshop Helped Save My Dad from eBay Fraud" by by Michael Zhang (on Petapixel.com)
My dad is an avid stamp collector. While he does have some US stamps in his collection, he mainly focuses on older stamps from China.
He used to purchase stamps exclusively from reputable stamp companies, but recently he’s been looking for good deals on rare stamps through eBay.
In the world of stamps, errors often cause the stamp to be worth much more than its face value since they’re highly sought after by collectors.
One such stamp is a 1962 stamp showing Tsai Lun, the inventor of paper. Right before the stamps were to begin the printing process, they discovered that the birth date had an extra character that erroneously listed the birth date as BC rather than AD. They had to correct the printing plates manually, but omitted one of them, causing a single error stamp to be printed with each batch.
Click here to continue reading and to find out how Photoshop came to the rescue of this stamp collector.
Enjoy.
My dad is an avid stamp collector. While he does have some US stamps in his collection, he mainly focuses on older stamps from China.
He used to purchase stamps exclusively from reputable stamp companies, but recently he’s been looking for good deals on rare stamps through eBay.
In the world of stamps, errors often cause the stamp to be worth much more than its face value since they’re highly sought after by collectors.
One such stamp is a 1962 stamp showing Tsai Lun, the inventor of paper. Right before the stamps were to begin the printing process, they discovered that the birth date had an extra character that erroneously listed the birth date as BC rather than AD. They had to correct the printing plates manually, but omitted one of them, causing a single error stamp to be printed with each batch.
Click here to continue reading and to find out how Photoshop came to the rescue of this stamp collector.
Enjoy.
CS5 is here!
This just in from Adobe:
"Join us April 12 and make your mark."
"With the right tools, your creative horizon changes. A tree is still timber, but suddenly in a whole new way. Old ideas germinate again, and new ideas branch into unexpected opportunities. Welcome to Adobe® Creative Suite® 5—software that will allow you to reach more people, more effectively, in more places, with whatever masterpiece you can imagine."
"Join us for the exclusive Global Online Launch Event, Monday, April 12, 2010."
Click here to register.
Enjoy.
"Join us April 12 and make your mark."
"With the right tools, your creative horizon changes. A tree is still timber, but suddenly in a whole new way. Old ideas germinate again, and new ideas branch into unexpected opportunities. Welcome to Adobe® Creative Suite® 5—software that will allow you to reach more people, more effectively, in more places, with whatever masterpiece you can imagine."
"Join us for the exclusive Global Online Launch Event, Monday, April 12, 2010."
Click here to register.
Enjoy.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
The importance of context
Here's an editorial from the Victoria Times Colonist that illustrates the need to preserve content and context when dealing with video.
Like the media's biassed editing of the Rodney King incident, "The video gives viewers a gut-wrenching sense of what happened during a brief period of time, less than a minute, early Sunday morning. What it does not show, however, is the initial assault, the arrival of the police, or the actions of all the men being arrested."
While the thrust of the piece is about "the need" for officers to utilise body worn video, I think it's subtext is that content and context is of vital importance ... and what happens (bad) when they aren't preserved.
Enjoy.
Like the media's biassed editing of the Rodney King incident, "The video gives viewers a gut-wrenching sense of what happened during a brief period of time, less than a minute, early Sunday morning. What it does not show, however, is the initial assault, the arrival of the police, or the actions of all the men being arrested."
While the thrust of the piece is about "the need" for officers to utilise body worn video, I think it's subtext is that content and context is of vital importance ... and what happens (bad) when they aren't preserved.
Enjoy.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Recording audio and the law
Whilst touring the ISC floor, I happened across the Louroe Electronics booth. (In fairness, I happen to be a long time and loyal customer, having used their venerable Verifact C microphones for almost a decade.)
I can't even begin to count the times that I've come across a CCTV installation that contained microphones in retail spaces, done without the requisite legal notices. Louroe takes the legal notification requirements very seriously.
United States Codes, Title 18, Section 2510 (2) states:
Oral communication means any "oral communication" uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.
By definition of the code section, a person cannot have an expectation of privacy, nor can he or she expect that communication will not be intercepted, if there are public signs posted, indicating that the communication is being monitored.
The First Amendment of the Constitution provides that any conversation between individuals is private, unless otherwise notified. In simple terms, this means that any overhearing or recording of a conversation is illegal ...unless both parties are aware that it is being done.
In order to comply with the law, LOUROE ELECTRONICS provides a disclaimer stating, AUDIO MONITORING ON THE PREMISES. These disclaimers must be affixed, in plain view, to all entrances where the microphones are installed.
It is suggested that distributors notify customers, at the time of installation (or sale) of the equipment, that disclaimers must be in plain view at all entrances and exits.
In that some state laws may vary, it is further suggested that you consult with your local attorney, and become fully aware of the local laws in this regard.
Federal Law References:
Federal Regulations, US Code, Title 18. Crime and Criminal Procedure, Sec 2510. (borrowed from the Louroe web site)
I like it when companies take their responsibilities seriously. When they do, they deserve a little extra recognition. It's important to realise that just because you can install microphones and listen in to your employees conversations doesn't mean that you should. If you do, you must understand the law as it pertains to these types of installations. Store owners have the added responsibility of letting their employees know that they whilst they are listening, they aren't "eavesdropping" on the employees private conversations - that they mics are just there to handle "business problems."
Enjoy.
I can't even begin to count the times that I've come across a CCTV installation that contained microphones in retail spaces, done without the requisite legal notices. Louroe takes the legal notification requirements very seriously.
United States Codes, Title 18, Section 2510 (2) states:
Oral communication means any "oral communication" uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.
By definition of the code section, a person cannot have an expectation of privacy, nor can he or she expect that communication will not be intercepted, if there are public signs posted, indicating that the communication is being monitored.
The First Amendment of the Constitution provides that any conversation between individuals is private, unless otherwise notified. In simple terms, this means that any overhearing or recording of a conversation is illegal ...unless both parties are aware that it is being done.
In order to comply with the law, LOUROE ELECTRONICS provides a disclaimer stating, AUDIO MONITORING ON THE PREMISES. These disclaimers must be affixed, in plain view, to all entrances where the microphones are installed.
It is suggested that distributors notify customers, at the time of installation (or sale) of the equipment, that disclaimers must be in plain view at all entrances and exits.
In that some state laws may vary, it is further suggested that you consult with your local attorney, and become fully aware of the local laws in this regard.
Federal Law References:
Federal Regulations, US Code, Title 18. Crime and Criminal Procedure, Sec 2510. (borrowed from the Louroe web site)
I like it when companies take their responsibilities seriously. When they do, they deserve a little extra recognition. It's important to realise that just because you can install microphones and listen in to your employees conversations doesn't mean that you should. If you do, you must understand the law as it pertains to these types of installations. Store owners have the added responsibility of letting their employees know that they whilst they are listening, they aren't "eavesdropping" on the employees private conversations - that they mics are just there to handle "business problems."
Enjoy.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
ISC West
I'm off to ISC West.
Each new year brings a record number of new DVRs, NVRs, and other new types of VRs. It's always fun to see how compressed video can get. It's even more fun talking with vendors. Most vendors consider the needs of the LE community "mildly interesting."
Nevertheless, it's off to ISC West. Having contact info from the vendors is vital when you're trying to figure out player/codec downloads and such.
Enjoy.
Each new year brings a record number of new DVRs, NVRs, and other new types of VRs. It's always fun to see how compressed video can get. It's even more fun talking with vendors. Most vendors consider the needs of the LE community "mildly interesting."
Nevertheless, it's off to ISC West. Having contact info from the vendors is vital when you're trying to figure out player/codec downloads and such.
Enjoy.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Caught on Camera
Best Practices for the Installation of Closed-Circuit Television Recording Systems
The Forensic Audio, Video and Image Analysis Unit (FAVIAU) of the FBI’s Operational Technology Division, presents Best Practices for the Installation of CCTV Recording Systems. The GRAND RELEASE of the DVD will take place at the ISC-West Conference March 24th and March 25th. At the conference there will be three sessions available for attendees to view the video and have a question and answer session with two examiners from the FBI.
This is a must-see DVD for fans of the television series 24. FBI Special Agent Renee Walker narrates the 20-minute program, which is based on a realistic case scenario featuring the do’s and don’ts of CCTV setup. The DVD contains exciting footage that captivates the audience while providing guidance to install CCTV to obtain the best possible recorded footage. Topics include general setup, resolution, cameras and camera placement, best collection methods of the recorded footage for law enforcement, native/proprietary file format, retrieval methods, and much more.
The DVD is available free to international, federal, state, and local governments involved in law enforcement, security, and counterterrorism activities. The FBI also encourages law enforcement to provide the DVD to anyone who owns, operates, installs, or is responsible for the purchase of CCTV recording systems. Educators, contractors, vendors, suppliers, and other interested parties may also obtain the DVD free.
To request a copy of the DVD send an email to cctvdvd[at]leo[dot]gov. Requests should include the requester’s name, position, agency name, street address (no post office boxes), and telephone number. Due to the volume of requests we expect, please allow extra time for delivery.
The video is available for viewing on fbi.gov.
Enjoy.
The Forensic Audio, Video and Image Analysis Unit (FAVIAU) of the FBI’s Operational Technology Division, presents Best Practices for the Installation of CCTV Recording Systems. The GRAND RELEASE of the DVD will take place at the ISC-West Conference March 24th and March 25th. At the conference there will be three sessions available for attendees to view the video and have a question and answer session with two examiners from the FBI.
This is a must-see DVD for fans of the television series 24. FBI Special Agent Renee Walker narrates the 20-minute program, which is based on a realistic case scenario featuring the do’s and don’ts of CCTV setup. The DVD contains exciting footage that captivates the audience while providing guidance to install CCTV to obtain the best possible recorded footage. Topics include general setup, resolution, cameras and camera placement, best collection methods of the recorded footage for law enforcement, native/proprietary file format, retrieval methods, and much more.
The DVD is available free to international, federal, state, and local governments involved in law enforcement, security, and counterterrorism activities. The FBI also encourages law enforcement to provide the DVD to anyone who owns, operates, installs, or is responsible for the purchase of CCTV recording systems. Educators, contractors, vendors, suppliers, and other interested parties may also obtain the DVD free.
To request a copy of the DVD send an email to cctvdvd[at]leo[dot]gov. Requests should include the requester’s name, position, agency name, street address (no post office boxes), and telephone number. Due to the volume of requests we expect, please allow extra time for delivery.
The video is available for viewing on fbi.gov.
Enjoy.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
The value of expertise
Here's a link to an interesting discussion on the merits of requiring a license to practice as a forensic examiner.
"... I run into computer service guys all the time that are now suddenly doing "forensics".
The recurring problem with that scenario is that they have no training or knowledge of evidence handling or preservation. The reason that people are vulnerable to this is simple: People think that computer expertise equals computer forensics expertise.
I submit that it does not ..."
Enjoy.
"... I run into computer service guys all the time that are now suddenly doing "forensics".
The recurring problem with that scenario is that they have no training or knowledge of evidence handling or preservation. The reason that people are vulnerable to this is simple: People think that computer expertise equals computer forensics expertise.
I submit that it does not ..."
Enjoy.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Upgrading Photoshop
This just in from Adobe's John Nack:
"If you're still on CS1 and want to upgrade, now's a good time
If you own a product from the first generation of the Creative Suite (e.g. Photoshop CS, released in 2003) and want to be able to upgrade it to a more recent version, now's a good time to pull the trigger.
I'm not hinting about the possible timing of future releases. I am noting, however, that Adobe introduced a "three versions back" policy a couple of years ago. That means that you can upgrade from CS, CS2, or CS3 to the current version (CS4). When the current version goes up by one, so will the cutoff for upgrades. Therefore if you're holding onto a copy of CS and may want to upgrade it at some point, well, you shouldn't wait too long."
Enjoy.
"If you're still on CS1 and want to upgrade, now's a good time
If you own a product from the first generation of the Creative Suite (e.g. Photoshop CS, released in 2003) and want to be able to upgrade it to a more recent version, now's a good time to pull the trigger.
I'm not hinting about the possible timing of future releases. I am noting, however, that Adobe introduced a "three versions back" policy a couple of years ago. That means that you can upgrade from CS, CS2, or CS3 to the current version (CS4). When the current version goes up by one, so will the cutoff for upgrades. Therefore if you're holding onto a copy of CS and may want to upgrade it at some point, well, you shouldn't wait too long."
Enjoy.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Missing or malfunctioning video
Here's a link to an interesting post about "missing or malfunctioning" video/audio and police testimony.
One judge on the case wrote, "At trial, Officer Evans described Appellant as unable to stand without swaying or holding on to the wall and unable to properly perform the field sobriety tests. The videotape reveals that Appellant swayed less than the officer and that Appellant performed substantially better than she did on the field sobriety tests." Officer testimony should not be accepted at face value over contradictory video evidence."
Remember, there are cameras everywhere.
That being said, there's every reason to make sure that the recording is authentic, has a proper chain of custordy, and accurately depicts the scene. In most cases, everything checks out and there are no problems. However, there are the occasional problems. That's where a trained and qualified analyst can make all the difference in the world. When in doubt, just reach out to your friendly local video expert for help.
Enjoy.
One judge on the case wrote, "At trial, Officer Evans described Appellant as unable to stand without swaying or holding on to the wall and unable to properly perform the field sobriety tests. The videotape reveals that Appellant swayed less than the officer and that Appellant performed substantially better than she did on the field sobriety tests." Officer testimony should not be accepted at face value over contradictory video evidence."
Remember, there are cameras everywhere.
That being said, there's every reason to make sure that the recording is authentic, has a proper chain of custordy, and accurately depicts the scene. In most cases, everything checks out and there are no problems. However, there are the occasional problems. That's where a trained and qualified analyst can make all the difference in the world. When in doubt, just reach out to your friendly local video expert for help.
Enjoy.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Windows 7 sound configuration issues
From Adobe's Ron Day, "We have been contacted by several users reporting that they have been unable to record properly into Audition or Soundbooth after switching to Windows 7. In every case thus far the cause has either been improper configuration in the Windows OS, incorrect input devices specified in Audition/Soundbooth, or making use of older sound card drivers or drivers not suitable for use in Windows 7 (32 or 64 bit).
One reason for the confusion in Windows 7 is the fact that the operating system now gives you much more control over the inputs and outputs. You must make sure that you have the correct device and input chosen in Windows 7 before any software application can record input. Audition and Soundbooth must also be configured properly, but the operating system settings will always control the input (unless you are using a higher end sound card that has a control panel of its own).
Click here for the rest of the story and the configuration help.
Enjoy.
One reason for the confusion in Windows 7 is the fact that the operating system now gives you much more control over the inputs and outputs. You must make sure that you have the correct device and input chosen in Windows 7 before any software application can record input. Audition and Soundbooth must also be configured properly, but the operating system settings will always control the input (unless you are using a higher end sound card that has a control panel of its own).
Click here for the rest of the story and the configuration help.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
The right to an attorney
In an interesting law suit in New York, the Public Defender program is being challenged as inadequate and failing to meet the requirements under Gideon v Wainright.
All of this begs the question, if you have the right to a public defender, do you also have the right to all the services that are available to the state? Services such as crime labs, latent print analysts, video analysts, and the like? If the courts are forced to appoint counsel, will the also be forced to appoint forensic practitioners?
"... You have the right to the services of forensic experts. If you can not afford these experts, they shall be appointed for you at no cost to you. Do you understand these rights as I have read them to you? ..."
Needless to say, we'll be watching this case closely.
Enjoy.
All of this begs the question, if you have the right to a public defender, do you also have the right to all the services that are available to the state? Services such as crime labs, latent print analysts, video analysts, and the like? If the courts are forced to appoint counsel, will the also be forced to appoint forensic practitioners?
"... You have the right to the services of forensic experts. If you can not afford these experts, they shall be appointed for you at no cost to you. Do you understand these rights as I have read them to you? ..."
Needless to say, we'll be watching this case closely.
Enjoy.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Fourth Amendment Seizures of Computer Data
Here's a link to an outstanding article from the Yale Law Review.
"Abstract. What does it mean to “seize” computer data for Fourth Amendment purposes? Does copying data amount to a seizure, and if so, when? This Article argues that copying data “seizes” it under the Fourth Amendment when copying occurs without human observation and interrupts the stream of possession or transmission. It offers this position by reaching back to the general purposes of regulating seizures in Fourth Amendment law and then applying those functions to the new environment of computers. The test prevents the government from copying data without regulation and yet also meets and answers the objections that have puzzled scholars and made it difficult to apply the old definition of seizures in the new computer environment."
Enjoy.
"Abstract. What does it mean to “seize” computer data for Fourth Amendment purposes? Does copying data amount to a seizure, and if so, when? This Article argues that copying data “seizes” it under the Fourth Amendment when copying occurs without human observation and interrupts the stream of possession or transmission. It offers this position by reaching back to the general purposes of regulating seizures in Fourth Amendment law and then applying those functions to the new environment of computers. The test prevents the government from copying data without regulation and yet also meets and answers the objections that have puzzled scholars and made it difficult to apply the old definition of seizures in the new computer environment."
Enjoy.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
8 Million requests for Sprint GPS data?
From the Slight Paranoia blog:
"... Sprint Nextel provided law enforcement agencies with its customers' (GPS) location information over 8 million times between September 2008 and October 2009. This massive disclosure of sensitive customer information was made possible due to the roll-out by Sprint of a new, special web portal for law enforcement officers."
Click here to read the rest of the post.
Enjoy.
"... Sprint Nextel provided law enforcement agencies with its customers' (GPS) location information over 8 million times between September 2008 and October 2009. This massive disclosure of sensitive customer information was made possible due to the roll-out by Sprint of a new, special web portal for law enforcement officers."
Click here to read the rest of the post.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Spy Cameras Won't Make Us Safer
From CNN's Bruce Schneier:
"Pervasive security cameras don't substantially reduce crime. This fact has been demonstrated repeatedly: in San Francisco public housing, in a New York apartment complex, in Philadelphia, in Washington, DC, in study after study in both the U.S. and the U.K. Nor are they instrumental in solving many crimes after the fact.
There are exceptions, of course, and proponents of cameras can always cherry-pick examples to bolster their argument. These success stories are what convince us; our brains are wired to respond more strongly to anecdotes than to data. But the data is clear: CCTV cameras have minimal value in the fight against crime.
While it's comforting to imagine vigilant police monitoring every camera, the truth is very different, for a variety of reasons: technological limitations of cameras, organizational limitations of police, and the adaptive abilities of criminals. No one looks at most CCTV footage until well after a crime is committed. And when the police do look at the recordings, it's very common for them to be unable to identify suspects. Criminals don't often stare helpfully at the lens, and -- unlike the Dubai assassins -- tend to wear sunglasses and hats. Cameras break far too often. Even when they afford quick identification -- think of the footage of the 9/11 terrorists going through airport security, or the 7/7 London transport bombers just before the bombs exploded -- police are often able to identify those suspects even without the cameras. Cameras afford a false sense of security, encouraging laziness when we need police to be vigilant.
The solution isn't for police to watch the cameras more diligently. Unlike an officer walking the street, cameras only look in particular directions at particular locations. Criminals know this, and can easily adapt by moving their crimes to places not watched by a camera -- and there will always be such places. And while a police officer on the street can respond to a crime in progress, someone watching a CCTV screen can only dispatch an officer to arrive much later. By their very nature, cameras result in underused and misallocated police resources."
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
"Pervasive security cameras don't substantially reduce crime. This fact has been demonstrated repeatedly: in San Francisco public housing, in a New York apartment complex, in Philadelphia, in Washington, DC, in study after study in both the U.S. and the U.K. Nor are they instrumental in solving many crimes after the fact.
There are exceptions, of course, and proponents of cameras can always cherry-pick examples to bolster their argument. These success stories are what convince us; our brains are wired to respond more strongly to anecdotes than to data. But the data is clear: CCTV cameras have minimal value in the fight against crime.
While it's comforting to imagine vigilant police monitoring every camera, the truth is very different, for a variety of reasons: technological limitations of cameras, organizational limitations of police, and the adaptive abilities of criminals. No one looks at most CCTV footage until well after a crime is committed. And when the police do look at the recordings, it's very common for them to be unable to identify suspects. Criminals don't often stare helpfully at the lens, and -- unlike the Dubai assassins -- tend to wear sunglasses and hats. Cameras break far too often. Even when they afford quick identification -- think of the footage of the 9/11 terrorists going through airport security, or the 7/7 London transport bombers just before the bombs exploded -- police are often able to identify those suspects even without the cameras. Cameras afford a false sense of security, encouraging laziness when we need police to be vigilant.
The solution isn't for police to watch the cameras more diligently. Unlike an officer walking the street, cameras only look in particular directions at particular locations. Criminals know this, and can easily adapt by moving their crimes to places not watched by a camera -- and there will always be such places. And while a police officer on the street can respond to a crime in progress, someone watching a CCTV screen can only dispatch an officer to arrive much later. By their very nature, cameras result in underused and misallocated police resources."
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
Monday, March 8, 2010
20 years of Photoshop
Here's a cool retrospective by David Biedny at MacLife.com to continue the celebration of Photoshop's 20th birthday.
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Snow Leopard or Windows 7?
With Windows 7 64bit out in circulation, there's been a lot of conversations about the differences in user experiences between Snow Leopard and 7. Here's a great synopsis from Adobe's Dave Helmly:
"I will say that Windows 7 64 is has been a huge hit for editors. The biggest difference performance wise between Mac & Windows has been in the area of graphics cards. Apple does not really allow 3rd parties (nvidia/ATI) direct access to the OS for certain calls to the GPU - what does this mean? It means that they can't do a lot of tweaking of the video driver like they can on Windows. Nvidia and ATI release lots of driver enhancements for Windows each year. The difference it not huge, but is noticeable."
Enjoy.
"I will say that Windows 7 64 is has been a huge hit for editors. The biggest difference performance wise between Mac & Windows has been in the area of graphics cards. Apple does not really allow 3rd parties (nvidia/ATI) direct access to the OS for certain calls to the GPU - what does this mean? It means that they can't do a lot of tweaking of the video driver like they can on Windows. Nvidia and ATI release lots of driver enhancements for Windows each year. The difference it not huge, but is noticeable."
Enjoy.
Friday, March 5, 2010
AAFS weighs in on NAS report
From the Seattle Times:
"Crime science tackles tainted image at Seattle meeting
The overriding issue at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Seattle this week isn't likely to find its way into a "CSI" television script. In the wake of a blistering report on the nation's crime labs, forensic experts are trying to shore up the scientific credentials of many of their workhorse techniques.
A National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel concluded last year that analysis of bite marks, blood spatters, handwriting and even fingerprints is not backed by the type of rigorous evidence that is standard in other scientific disciplines.
"The dominant message here ... is that the emperor really doesn't have all his clothes on," said Donald Kennedy, former president of Stanford University and an organizer of the NAS review.
Bohan said most forensic scientists have taken that message to heart.
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy established a forensic-science subcommittee, and legislation will be introduced in Congress next month to bolster research and oversight of crime labs. But Bohan is impatient for progress.
"Everybody is talking about what to do," he said.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is beginning to fund fundamental research in several areas, including ballistics and fire-debris analysis, said Michael Sheppo, leader of the forensic sciences at DOJ's research arm."
Click here for the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
"Crime science tackles tainted image at Seattle meeting
The overriding issue at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Seattle this week isn't likely to find its way into a "CSI" television script. In the wake of a blistering report on the nation's crime labs, forensic experts are trying to shore up the scientific credentials of many of their workhorse techniques.
A National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel concluded last year that analysis of bite marks, blood spatters, handwriting and even fingerprints is not backed by the type of rigorous evidence that is standard in other scientific disciplines.
"The dominant message here ... is that the emperor really doesn't have all his clothes on," said Donald Kennedy, former president of Stanford University and an organizer of the NAS review.
Bohan said most forensic scientists have taken that message to heart.
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy established a forensic-science subcommittee, and legislation will be introduced in Congress next month to bolster research and oversight of crime labs. But Bohan is impatient for progress.
"Everybody is talking about what to do," he said.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is beginning to fund fundamental research in several areas, including ballistics and fire-debris analysis, said Michael Sheppo, leader of the forensic sciences at DOJ's research arm."
Click here for the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
An alternative to HighPass?
This technique came up in a discussion on alternative methods and crazy ways of doing things in Photoshop. It's a HighPass alternative and quite a time saver.
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Details Matter: Correct Colours and PDF
There's an interesting post on the Adobe blogs that shows the results of not paying attention when viewing PDF documents with non-standard readers. "What does this all mean to you? Non-conforming viewers are introducing a risk factor to your workflows, and may not be displaying or printing what was originally intended, whether that is now or well into the future."
Read the entire post and download the samples for yourself by clicking here.
Enjoy.
Read the entire post and download the samples for yourself by clicking here.
Enjoy.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Legal news
There's been a lot of discussion about CCTV based evidence and the lack of clear case law. Today in Los Angeles Superior Court, an interesting discussion and decision (or non-decision) was made.
In People v. Otis Vann (BA3531183), the defendant believes that a privately owned CCTV system "witnessed" the crime for which he is charged and that the video will show that he is innocent. OK so far ... just go out and retrieve the evidence, right? Not so fast. The PC based DVR's software shows that the date in question is not on the system any more.
The defendant requested that the judge issue an order requiring the CCTV system be given over to the police agency's computer crimes unit for analysis and that they attempt to recover the lost data. The judge declined, citing a lack of compelling evidence that the data would be present or case law that would lead her to remove the privately held system from service for an indeterminate amount of time when the owner is not charged with the crime.
This is important to consider. The judge did not order the CCTV system seized, even though it may contain evidence.
This throws a large monkey wrench in the works of the "bag-it-and-tag-it" crowd. The owner of the system did not want to be without his equipment and did not believe that he should bear the cost of replacing it in order to help the police with their case. The police could not afford to lend the owner a replacement for his rather elaborate system (perfectly understandable given the current financial state of California).
What to do? We know what the judge did. What would you have done? What case law would you have cited? What say you?
Enjoy.
In People v. Otis Vann (BA3531183), the defendant believes that a privately owned CCTV system "witnessed" the crime for which he is charged and that the video will show that he is innocent. OK so far ... just go out and retrieve the evidence, right? Not so fast. The PC based DVR's software shows that the date in question is not on the system any more.
The defendant requested that the judge issue an order requiring the CCTV system be given over to the police agency's computer crimes unit for analysis and that they attempt to recover the lost data. The judge declined, citing a lack of compelling evidence that the data would be present or case law that would lead her to remove the privately held system from service for an indeterminate amount of time when the owner is not charged with the crime.
This is important to consider. The judge did not order the CCTV system seized, even though it may contain evidence.
This throws a large monkey wrench in the works of the "bag-it-and-tag-it" crowd. The owner of the system did not want to be without his equipment and did not believe that he should bear the cost of replacing it in order to help the police with their case. The police could not afford to lend the owner a replacement for his rather elaborate system (perfectly understandable given the current financial state of California).
What to do? We know what the judge did. What would you have done? What case law would you have cited? What say you?
Enjoy.
Friday, February 26, 2010
DRAFT - LEVA's Best Practices for the Acquisition of DME open for comments
LEVA announced a public comment period for the third edition of their DME best practices guide (find the info here). There are some important / significant changes that have been made that you'll want to be aware of. I would especially advise small agencies and privateers to take note, read the draft, and make your comments before the deadline.
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Homomorphic Range Compression
After watching the video presentation from Dr. John C. Russ, many readers wrote in to ask specific questions about the procedures that he describes. Today we'll deal with Homomorphic Range Compression.
Some folks were trying to duplicate Dr. Russ' work in Photoshop and getting frustrated. They were using Curves and Levels adjustments, but couldn't seem to get the same results. These histogram-based contrast adjustments work differently. You'll need Fovea Pro, a reasonably priced set of plug-ins from Reindeer Graphics, to duplicate Dr. Russ' presentation examples.
According to Dr. Russ
, Homomorphic Range Compression "... performed using the Fourier transform, uses the magnitude of the power spectrum itself to design a custom filter for each image. The result reduces the overall contrast range of the image but increaes the contrast for those particular frequencies (and orientations) that are most important in the image."
Below is an image of a vehicle, shot in an underground parking garage, with a darkened interior. Homomorphic range compression can be utilised to bring out details from within the vehicle.
Here's how. Once loaded, select an area of interest using the Marquee Tool and click on Filters>IP•Adjust>Homomorphic Compression. There's no user input, no sliders, nothing to do beyond selecting the filter. Just sit back and wait for the filter to work it's magic.
And here's the result:
There's a lot more detail visible.
Enjoy.
Some folks were trying to duplicate Dr. Russ' work in Photoshop and getting frustrated. They were using Curves and Levels adjustments, but couldn't seem to get the same results. These histogram-based contrast adjustments work differently. You'll need Fovea Pro, a reasonably priced set of plug-ins from Reindeer Graphics, to duplicate Dr. Russ' presentation examples.
According to Dr. Russ
, Homomorphic Range Compression "... performed using the Fourier transform, uses the magnitude of the power spectrum itself to design a custom filter for each image. The result reduces the overall contrast range of the image but increaes the contrast for those particular frequencies (and orientations) that are most important in the image."Below is an image of a vehicle, shot in an underground parking garage, with a darkened interior. Homomorphic range compression can be utilised to bring out details from within the vehicle.
Here's how. Once loaded, select an area of interest using the Marquee Tool and click on Filters>IP•Adjust>Homomorphic Compression. There's no user input, no sliders, nothing to do beyond selecting the filter. Just sit back and wait for the filter to work it's magic.
And here's the result:
There's a lot more detail visible.
Enjoy.
Aperture 3 vs. Lightroom?
With the release of Aperture 3, there's been a lot of buzz. It's funny how times change. When Aperture first came out, folks tried in vain to compare it to Photoshop. They've largely stopped that now. Now, they're focussed on Aperture vs Lightroom.
Check out the Lightroom Killer Tips blog for the latest blow-by-blow.
Enjoy.
Check out the Lightroom Killer Tips blog for the latest blow-by-blow.
Enjoy.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Full Daubert Hearing Is Not Always Required To Admit Expert Testimony
From Federal Evidence Review:
"Fifth Circuit holds that “absent novel challenges, fingerprint evidence is sufficiently reliable to satisfy Rule 702 and Daubert,” and a Daubert hearing is not necessarily required, in United States v. John, _ F.3d. _ (5th Cir. Feb. 9, 2010) (No. 08-10459) A recent Fifth Circuit case considered an appeal that contended that the trial court failed to hold a Daubert hearing before admitting fingerprint expert testimony. The circuit noted that whether a Daubert hearing is required before an expert testifies generally lies within the discretion of the trial court and was not required for fingerprint testimony that did not raise any novel issues.
In the case, the defendant served as a Citigroup account manager. She accessed the company computers and obtained customer account information which she provided to her half-brother who used the accounts fraudulently. At her trial, the government presented an expert witness who identified her fingerprints on Citigroup documents which were possessed by her half-brother. Following her conviction, she claimed the trial court had “abdicated its gatekeeping function” by not holding a Daubert hearing, under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1999)."
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
"Fifth Circuit holds that “absent novel challenges, fingerprint evidence is sufficiently reliable to satisfy Rule 702 and Daubert,” and a Daubert hearing is not necessarily required, in United States v. John, _ F.3d. _ (5th Cir. Feb. 9, 2010) (No. 08-10459) A recent Fifth Circuit case considered an appeal that contended that the trial court failed to hold a Daubert hearing before admitting fingerprint expert testimony. The circuit noted that whether a Daubert hearing is required before an expert testifies generally lies within the discretion of the trial court and was not required for fingerprint testimony that did not raise any novel issues.
In the case, the defendant served as a Citigroup account manager. She accessed the company computers and obtained customer account information which she provided to her half-brother who used the accounts fraudulently. At her trial, the government presented an expert witness who identified her fingerprints on Citigroup documents which were possessed by her half-brother. Following her conviction, she claimed the trial court had “abdicated its gatekeeping function” by not holding a Daubert hearing, under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1999)."
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Happy Birthday Photoshop
There are a number of exciting activities going on worldwide to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Photoshop. You can be a part of the celebrations:
- Watch the live streaming of the 20th Aniversary celebrations from San Francisco. The webcast starts at 7:30 pm Pacific Time (10:30 EST).
- Visit the Photoshop 20th Anniversary Landing Page, specially created for this momentous event.
- Watch the Special Layer Tennis Match, Photoshop 20th Edition live today - featuring two designers plus running commentary by John Nack. Click here for details.
- Check out the special new tab on the Photoshop Facebook page in honor of the 20th anniversary.
- Check out the film - "Startup Memories" now live on Adobe TV. Produced by Adobe TV and Adobe Content Strategy & Service teams, this 18-minute documentary has the 4 founders of Photoshop telling the story of how it all began 20 years ago.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Forensic Photoshop - hands-on class
Forensic Photoshop for Law Enforcement at LA CLEAR - 8 hours (hands on) (skill level - basic/intermediate)
The next scheduled class is set for Thursday, April 29th, 2010 at LA CLEAR in Commerce, Ca.
This training is for LE, Fire, and military personnel. ID will be verified.
If you are working with images in an LE, fire, or military setting, this class is for you.
Click on the link for more details. Click here to see all the offerings at LA HIDTA Training.
This class has been approved for 8 hours of credit towards your LEVA certification or continuing education requirement and 8 hours of CA POST credit.
The next scheduled class is set for Thursday, April 29th, 2010 at LA CLEAR in Commerce, Ca.
This training is for LE, Fire, and military personnel. ID will be verified.
If you are working with images in an LE, fire, or military setting, this class is for you.
Click on the link for more details. Click here to see all the offerings at LA HIDTA Training.
This class has been approved for 8 hours of credit towards your LEVA certification or continuing education requirement and 8 hours of CA POST credit.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Acrobat 9 WebCapture issues explained
Grabbing content from web pages can be a pain for law enforcement. Screen captures, grabbers, and the like promise a good game ... but most have their limitations.
A reader wrote in a bit ago to ask about using the WebCapture feature in Adobe Acrobat 9 to grab and save web pages. They were particularly concerned with getting active content on the pages.
Here's a link to the PDF Developers' blog that explains what WebCapture can do, and what it cant.
Enjoy.
A reader wrote in a bit ago to ask about using the WebCapture feature in Adobe Acrobat 9 to grab and save web pages. They were particularly concerned with getting active content on the pages.
Here's a link to the PDF Developers' blog that explains what WebCapture can do, and what it cant.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Key Evidence Cases Resources Page
From Federal Evidence Review:
The Key Evidence Cases Resource Page highlights noteworthy United States Supreme Court cases involving the Federal Rules of Evidence or other questions of evidence.
The Federal Evidence Review has identified several key evidence cases decided by the United States Supreme Court. The cases are listed alphabetically below; many of the cases may be accessed by clicking on the case name.
The case may be located by the case name in the first column; the evidence issue or applicable rule of evidence is noted in the second column. The third column summarizes the evidentiary significance of the case. Where possible, the page of the holding is noted in brackets.
Click here for the resource page.
Enjoy.
The Key Evidence Cases Resource Page highlights noteworthy United States Supreme Court cases involving the Federal Rules of Evidence or other questions of evidence.
The Federal Evidence Review has identified several key evidence cases decided by the United States Supreme Court. The cases are listed alphabetically below; many of the cases may be accessed by clicking on the case name.
The case may be located by the case name in the first column; the evidence issue or applicable rule of evidence is noted in the second column. The third column summarizes the evidentiary significance of the case. Where possible, the page of the holding is noted in brackets.
Click here for the resource page.
Enjoy.
Monday, February 15, 2010
How I spent my weekend
Here's a little something from my weekend at the Queen Mary Highland Games in Long Beach, Ca.
Tossing the 22lb stone for distance.
17' 115# Caber. It's an accuracy event.
Try a little photogrammetry on the caber.
Tossing the 20# sheaf. We finished up at 20'
I finished first over-all in my class and had a great time doing it.
Happy President's Day.
I finished first over-all in my class and had a great time doing it.
Happy President's Day.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Demonstrative Evidence Video Of Pipe Bomb Tests Was Not Unfairly Prejudicial
From Federal Evidence Review:
"In prosecution for conspiring to make and making a pipe bomb, demonstrative video showing three tests, played at three different speeds, was probative to show the devices were “destructive devices” and were not unfairly prejudicial based on the “bare allegation” that the bombs in the video were significantly different than the charged devices, in United States v. Spoerke, 568 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. May 22, 2009) (No. 08-12910) The use of demonstrative evidence at trial is normally controlled by the court through FRE 611(a). See FRE 611(a) ACN (noting the rule “covers such concerns as … the use of demonstrative evidence”). However, the admissibility of demonstrative exhibits remains subject to being relevant under FRE 401, challenges of unfair prejudice under FRE 403, and authentication under FRE 901. A recent Eleventh Circuit case highlighted the application of FRE 403 to a demonstrative video in a pipe bomb case.
In the case, a car was stopped for littering. Defendant Spoerke was a passenger in the front seat and defendant Kramer was the driver, along with other passengers. During the stop, the officer observed what appeared to be “improvised explosive devices” in the vehicle. The occupants also appeared to possess suspected burglary tools. When the officer removed the devices and placed them on the vehicle roof, he asked what they were. The defendant responded that “they were ‘pipe bombs’ that they liked to ‘throw . . . in canals and watch . . . explode.’” Upon the discovery of other tools and materials for making a pipe bomb, the occupants were detained for possessing bombs. A bomb squad arrived and deactivated the devices. The driver acknowledged that the bombs were made at his residence. After further consent to search of the vehicle and two residences, defendants Spoerke and Kramer were charged with conspiring to make destructive devices and making one or more destructive devices.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
"In prosecution for conspiring to make and making a pipe bomb, demonstrative video showing three tests, played at three different speeds, was probative to show the devices were “destructive devices” and were not unfairly prejudicial based on the “bare allegation” that the bombs in the video were significantly different than the charged devices, in United States v. Spoerke, 568 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. May 22, 2009) (No. 08-12910) The use of demonstrative evidence at trial is normally controlled by the court through FRE 611(a). See FRE 611(a) ACN (noting the rule “covers such concerns as … the use of demonstrative evidence”). However, the admissibility of demonstrative exhibits remains subject to being relevant under FRE 401, challenges of unfair prejudice under FRE 403, and authentication under FRE 901. A recent Eleventh Circuit case highlighted the application of FRE 403 to a demonstrative video in a pipe bomb case.
In the case, a car was stopped for littering. Defendant Spoerke was a passenger in the front seat and defendant Kramer was the driver, along with other passengers. During the stop, the officer observed what appeared to be “improvised explosive devices” in the vehicle. The occupants also appeared to possess suspected burglary tools. When the officer removed the devices and placed them on the vehicle roof, he asked what they were. The defendant responded that “they were ‘pipe bombs’ that they liked to ‘throw . . . in canals and watch . . . explode.’” Upon the discovery of other tools and materials for making a pipe bomb, the occupants were detained for possessing bombs. A bomb squad arrived and deactivated the devices. The driver acknowledged that the bombs were made at his residence. After further consent to search of the vehicle and two residences, defendants Spoerke and Kramer were charged with conspiring to make destructive devices and making one or more destructive devices.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Avoiding Impermissible Blurring Of Law Enforcement Expert And Lay Testimony
From Federal Evidence Review:
"Ninth Circuit affirms use of law enforcement lay and expert testimony where the trial court divided the testimony in phases and provided a jury instruction advising that the jurors were the ultimate fact finders; the expert also did not provide impermissible opinion testimony concerning the defendant’s intent, in United States v. Anchrum, _ F.3d _ (7th Cir. Dec.30, 2009)
We have previously noted the special problems that may arise when a law enforcement witness provides both expert and lay testimony. See Overcoming Potential Prejudice Concerns In Using A Dual Fact and Expert Law Enforcement Witness; Plain Error Results In Using Dual Fact And Expert Witness; Problem Of Dual Expert and Fact Law Enforcement Testimony Avoided By Steps Taken In Drug Trial. While this dual testimony is not per se inadmissible, unless certain trial precautions are taken, the dual testimony may be subject to challenge on appeal based on the blurring of lay and expert testimony. A recent Ninth Circuit case considered this issue and highlighted the steps that may be taken to avoid possible error."
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
"Ninth Circuit affirms use of law enforcement lay and expert testimony where the trial court divided the testimony in phases and provided a jury instruction advising that the jurors were the ultimate fact finders; the expert also did not provide impermissible opinion testimony concerning the defendant’s intent, in United States v. Anchrum, _ F.3d _ (7th Cir. Dec.30, 2009)
We have previously noted the special problems that may arise when a law enforcement witness provides both expert and lay testimony. See Overcoming Potential Prejudice Concerns In Using A Dual Fact and Expert Law Enforcement Witness; Plain Error Results In Using Dual Fact And Expert Witness; Problem Of Dual Expert and Fact Law Enforcement Testimony Avoided By Steps Taken In Drug Trial. While this dual testimony is not per se inadmissible, unless certain trial precautions are taken, the dual testimony may be subject to challenge on appeal based on the blurring of lay and expert testimony. A recent Ninth Circuit case considered this issue and highlighted the steps that may be taken to avoid possible error."
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Ten Key Evidence Issues For 2010
From Federal Evidence Review:
"... Today, we look forward at potential evidence issues in the year ahead. These issues, which are not necessarily ranked in any order, are discussed below: Many involve Congressional recognition or changes to privileges, such as a new qualified reporter privilege or clarifications to the application of the state secret and attorney-client privileges. Other issues concern the application of the Confrontation Clause, and circuit splits on the selective waiver doctrine and the application of the former testimony hearsay exception to exculpatory grand jury testimony."
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
"... Today, we look forward at potential evidence issues in the year ahead. These issues, which are not necessarily ranked in any order, are discussed below: Many involve Congressional recognition or changes to privileges, such as a new qualified reporter privilege or clarifications to the application of the state secret and attorney-client privileges. Other issues concern the application of the Confrontation Clause, and circuit splits on the selective waiver doctrine and the application of the former testimony hearsay exception to exculpatory grand jury testimony."
Click here to read the rest of the story.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Outsourcing Forensic Analysis
In a recent article, Evidence Technology Magazine explores the outsourcing of forensic evidence processing. Yesterday, I posted a link to Forensic Magazine's article on public / private partnerships. Seeing a theme here?
Budgets are shrinking. Backlogs are growing. Agencies are having trouble handling the backlogs and can't hire new staff. Where to turn? Private industry.
When it comes to the analysis and clarification of video / image based evidence, I get requests for referrals all the time. Same holds true for audio. I'm starting to see a lot more requests for help with cell phones. Remember, if you are in need of assistance ... and you're from a public or private agency, law firm, or just a citizen in need of help ... I can get you pointed in the right direction. Feel free to send me a note (jimhoerricks (at) gmail (dot) com). The only dumb questions are the ones that go unasked.
Enjoy.
Budgets are shrinking. Backlogs are growing. Agencies are having trouble handling the backlogs and can't hire new staff. Where to turn? Private industry.
When it comes to the analysis and clarification of video / image based evidence, I get requests for referrals all the time. Same holds true for audio. I'm starting to see a lot more requests for help with cell phones. Remember, if you are in need of assistance ... and you're from a public or private agency, law firm, or just a citizen in need of help ... I can get you pointed in the right direction. Feel free to send me a note (jimhoerricks (at) gmail (dot) com). The only dumb questions are the ones that go unasked.
Enjoy.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Working Together To Solve Crime
In an interesting article about public and private agencies working together to clear the DNA backlog, the author brings up an interesting question ... what role does the private industry have in helping the courts clear evidence backlogs and prepare evidence for trial?
In the case of DNA, the partnership may be new. But in other areas, it happens all the time. Private firms work cases involving all sorts of physical evidence for the courts - in both civil and criminal matters.
Read the article and see for yourself. The evidence shows that privateers have much to offer the justice system. What say you?
Enjoy.
In the case of DNA, the partnership may be new. But in other areas, it happens all the time. Private firms work cases involving all sorts of physical evidence for the courts - in both civil and criminal matters.
Read the article and see for yourself. The evidence shows that privateers have much to offer the justice system. What say you?
Enjoy.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Factors For Admitting “Partially Inaudible” Recordings
From Federal Review:
"Eighth Circuit rules that partially inaudible recordings with a confidential informant may be admitted when the trial court finds that they “provide [the] jury with the ‘gist’ of the conversations” so that any inaudible portions do not “render” the tapes untrustworthy as a whole, in United States v. Trogdon, 575 F.3d 762 (8th Cir. Aug 6, 2009) (No. 08-2858)
Not all recordings for trial are clearly audible. As a pragmatic matter, some portions may be more audible than others. A number of factors may contribute to the quality of the recording including the recording device and external or environmental factors (such as a noisy restaurant or busy freeway in the background). At what point does a recording which contains inaudible portions become inadmissible? The Eighth Circuit reviewed a recent claim that the entire recording should have been excluded since some portions were inaudible.
In the case, defendant Trogdon was charged with conspiracy to distribute marijuana after an investigation. Police closed his operation, arresting various participants and receiving their cooperation. Ultimately one cooperating participant, named Chapman, agreed to cooperate and wear a recording device during two meetings with the defendant. The recording quality “turned out to be poor, however, because the wire was taped to Chapman's leg, and Chapman's movement during the encounter interfered with the recording process.” Trogdon, 575 F.3d at 764.
Before trial, the defendant filed a motion in limine to exclude the audiotape recordings of his two meetings with cooperating witness Chapman in their entirety. The trial court reserved ruling on the motion until any specific portions were offered at trial. At trial, the government introduced the recordings with a transcript. No objection was lodged by the defendant to the recordings. After his conviction, he renewed his challenged to the admission of the recordings based on inaudible passages."
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
"Eighth Circuit rules that partially inaudible recordings with a confidential informant may be admitted when the trial court finds that they “provide [the] jury with the ‘gist’ of the conversations” so that any inaudible portions do not “render” the tapes untrustworthy as a whole, in United States v. Trogdon, 575 F.3d 762 (8th Cir. Aug 6, 2009) (No. 08-2858)
Not all recordings for trial are clearly audible. As a pragmatic matter, some portions may be more audible than others. A number of factors may contribute to the quality of the recording including the recording device and external or environmental factors (such as a noisy restaurant or busy freeway in the background). At what point does a recording which contains inaudible portions become inadmissible? The Eighth Circuit reviewed a recent claim that the entire recording should have been excluded since some portions were inaudible.
In the case, defendant Trogdon was charged with conspiracy to distribute marijuana after an investigation. Police closed his operation, arresting various participants and receiving their cooperation. Ultimately one cooperating participant, named Chapman, agreed to cooperate and wear a recording device during two meetings with the defendant. The recording quality “turned out to be poor, however, because the wire was taped to Chapman's leg, and Chapman's movement during the encounter interfered with the recording process.” Trogdon, 575 F.3d at 764.
Before trial, the defendant filed a motion in limine to exclude the audiotape recordings of his two meetings with cooperating witness Chapman in their entirety. The trial court reserved ruling on the motion until any specific portions were offered at trial. At trial, the government introduced the recordings with a transcript. No objection was lodged by the defendant to the recordings. After his conviction, he renewed his challenged to the admission of the recordings based on inaudible passages."
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Enjoy.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Expert Witness: Effective Courtroom Testimony
From the Febuary/March issue of Forensic Magazine:
"It is important to look, sound, and act the part to be a convincing and effective Expert Witness.
It’s not enough to have the right evidence: an Expert Witness must be able to present evidence persuasively without confusing the jury.
Looking the Part
As an Expert Witness, you must first look like an Expert. This starts before you ever leave home. Here are some simple tips to exude professionalism through your appearance. Begin with a well-tailored business suit, a pressed shirt, and non-descript tie (for males). Ladies, keep the jewelry small and simple. Think professional when selecting your courtroom wardrobe. Darker colors are best for suits with lighter colored shirts. If you are not accustomed to wearing a suit, it will show if you feel uncomfortable. If you are squirming, your unconscious behavior may undermine your testimony. I suggest you wear your suit a couple times before your court appearance. Keep your pockets pinned or sewn closed. This keeps your hands out of your pockets and keeps you from loading pockets with bulky items that jingle. If you need reading glasses, have them easily accessible.
Stand with your shoulders over your hips with feet shoulder width apart. Place your hands comfortably at your side, not in your pockets. Walk with a purposeful stride. When sitting, place your buttock into the back of the seat. This will keep you from slouching and will force your body to sit up with a slightly forward lean. Don’t cross your legs above the knees."
Read the rest of this article by clicking here.
Enjoy.
"It is important to look, sound, and act the part to be a convincing and effective Expert Witness.
It’s not enough to have the right evidence: an Expert Witness must be able to present evidence persuasively without confusing the jury.
Looking the Part
As an Expert Witness, you must first look like an Expert. This starts before you ever leave home. Here are some simple tips to exude professionalism through your appearance. Begin with a well-tailored business suit, a pressed shirt, and non-descript tie (for males). Ladies, keep the jewelry small and simple. Think professional when selecting your courtroom wardrobe. Darker colors are best for suits with lighter colored shirts. If you are not accustomed to wearing a suit, it will show if you feel uncomfortable. If you are squirming, your unconscious behavior may undermine your testimony. I suggest you wear your suit a couple times before your court appearance. Keep your pockets pinned or sewn closed. This keeps your hands out of your pockets and keeps you from loading pockets with bulky items that jingle. If you need reading glasses, have them easily accessible.
Stand with your shoulders over your hips with feet shoulder width apart. Place your hands comfortably at your side, not in your pockets. Walk with a purposeful stride. When sitting, place your buttock into the back of the seat. This will keep you from slouching and will force your body to sit up with a slightly forward lean. Don’t cross your legs above the knees."
Read the rest of this article by clicking here.
Enjoy.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Hany Farid, Dartmouth Scientist, Says Controversial Oswald Rifle Photo Real
From the AP's Holly Ramer:
"The infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle in his backyard would have been nearly impossible to fake, according to a new analysis by a Dartmouth College professor.
Oswald, who was shot to death days after being charged with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, claimed the photo of him holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other had been doctored. Over the years, many others have pointed out what appear to be inconsistent lighting and shadows.
But Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth, said the shadows are exactly where they should be.
"You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday. "As an academic and a scientist, I don't like to say it's absolutely authentic ... but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake."
Farid, whose work using digital forensic tools to analyze images often has been used by law enforcement, said he has been getting requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photo for years. He said he held off until he had the appropriate software to create three-dimensional models of Oswald's head and surroundings."
Read the rest of the story by clicking here. Watch the YouTube Video here.
Enjoy.
"The infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle in his backyard would have been nearly impossible to fake, according to a new analysis by a Dartmouth College professor.
Oswald, who was shot to death days after being charged with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, claimed the photo of him holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other had been doctored. Over the years, many others have pointed out what appear to be inconsistent lighting and shadows.
But Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth, said the shadows are exactly where they should be.
"You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday. "As an academic and a scientist, I don't like to say it's absolutely authentic ... but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake."
Farid, whose work using digital forensic tools to analyze images often has been used by law enforcement, said he has been getting requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photo for years. He said he held off until he had the appropriate software to create three-dimensional models of Oswald's head and surroundings."
Read the rest of the story by clicking here. Watch the YouTube Video here.
Enjoy.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
California Review of Forensic Science Complete
From Forensic Magazine:
"The California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force has released An Examination of Forensic Science in California, including its observations and recommendations for crime labs in the state.
California enacted legislation in October 2007 to review the state’s crime laboratory system with a mandate to the Department of Justice to create and chair the California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force.
The Task Force held monthly meetings from December 2007 through September 2009, in which members heard presentations from various organizations and individuals with expertise in crime laboratory oversight, ethics, and management; accreditation and certification; and forensic education and training. The Task Force also drafted a 19-page survey that was sent to each of the major crime labs operated by state, county, or local agencies for their input.
Based on the results of these efforts, the Task Force prepared their report, An Examination of Forensic Science in California, with two goals in mind. First, to provide an accurate snapshot of the current condition of government-funded forensic science in California, including descriptions and explanations of both successful and failed delivery of timely, reliable, scientific testing; and second, to recommend steps that state and local policymakers can take to identify and address deficiencies in the field while continuing to support its achievements.
The report specifically addressed organization and management, staff and training, certification, funding, performance standards and equipment, and statewide forensic science oversight. The most notable of their recommendations involved certification, funding, and statewide oversight.
The Task Force recommended that all persons who practice in a forensic science discipline or testify as a forensic science analyst/examiner should become certified by a reputable certifying body and outlined recommendations on education and certification.
They also declared that crime laboratory funding in California is inadequate, unpredictable, and too unstable to meet current demands or expectations of future growth, and that changes to the existing funding to crime laboratories are needed to restore and enhance the effective delivery of forensic science services in California. A fact well known to crime labs throughout the country.
Finally, they recommended oversight through a statewide body that would consider issues related to forensic science. The shape this body might take will be revealed in a future report."
To read more and get the link to the full report, click here.
Enjoy.
"The California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force has released An Examination of Forensic Science in California, including its observations and recommendations for crime labs in the state.
California enacted legislation in October 2007 to review the state’s crime laboratory system with a mandate to the Department of Justice to create and chair the California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force.
The Task Force held monthly meetings from December 2007 through September 2009, in which members heard presentations from various organizations and individuals with expertise in crime laboratory oversight, ethics, and management; accreditation and certification; and forensic education and training. The Task Force also drafted a 19-page survey that was sent to each of the major crime labs operated by state, county, or local agencies for their input.
Based on the results of these efforts, the Task Force prepared their report, An Examination of Forensic Science in California, with two goals in mind. First, to provide an accurate snapshot of the current condition of government-funded forensic science in California, including descriptions and explanations of both successful and failed delivery of timely, reliable, scientific testing; and second, to recommend steps that state and local policymakers can take to identify and address deficiencies in the field while continuing to support its achievements.
The report specifically addressed organization and management, staff and training, certification, funding, performance standards and equipment, and statewide forensic science oversight. The most notable of their recommendations involved certification, funding, and statewide oversight.
The Task Force recommended that all persons who practice in a forensic science discipline or testify as a forensic science analyst/examiner should become certified by a reputable certifying body and outlined recommendations on education and certification.
They also declared that crime laboratory funding in California is inadequate, unpredictable, and too unstable to meet current demands or expectations of future growth, and that changes to the existing funding to crime laboratories are needed to restore and enhance the effective delivery of forensic science services in California. A fact well known to crime labs throughout the country.
Finally, they recommended oversight through a statewide body that would consider issues related to forensic science. The shape this body might take will be revealed in a future report."
To read more and get the link to the full report, click here.
Enjoy.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Image Processing of Forensic Evidence
For those that missed it, here's a link to Dr. John C. Russ' seminar called Image Processing of Forensic Evidence that was part of NC State's Forensic Science Symposium. Thanks to Larry for putting this out there.
An excerpt from the seminar. Dr. John C. Russ: "... the image that has been given to me has been compressed with JPEG compression. Don't do that. If you are using a camera that does JPEG compression, sooner or later, there's going to be a cross examination that goes something like this. 'So officer, this picture was taken with a brand X camera that does JPEG compression, right?' 'Right.' 'And JPEG compression, according to the statement of the Joint Photographers Expert Group, is designed to preserve that information which is useful for people to identify familiar objects. Isn't that correct?' 'Well, yes.' 'So it's a lossy technique and it discards information that doesn't help in that situation. Can you show me what information has been discarded from this picture that might be exculpatory for my client?' And of course you can't, because what it throws away depends on the contents of the particular picture. The more detail that's there, the more it throws away. And, at that point, your credibility's been damaged and even if there is information in the picture, it's going to be hard to convince people ..."
Enjoy.
An excerpt from the seminar. Dr. John C. Russ: "... the image that has been given to me has been compressed with JPEG compression. Don't do that. If you are using a camera that does JPEG compression, sooner or later, there's going to be a cross examination that goes something like this. 'So officer, this picture was taken with a brand X camera that does JPEG compression, right?' 'Right.' 'And JPEG compression, according to the statement of the Joint Photographers Expert Group, is designed to preserve that information which is useful for people to identify familiar objects. Isn't that correct?' 'Well, yes.' 'So it's a lossy technique and it discards information that doesn't help in that situation. Can you show me what information has been discarded from this picture that might be exculpatory for my client?' And of course you can't, because what it throws away depends on the contents of the particular picture. The more detail that's there, the more it throws away. And, at that point, your credibility's been damaged and even if there is information in the picture, it's going to be hard to convince people ..."
Enjoy.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Photoshop for Law Enforcement
Photoshop for Law Enforcement at LA CLEAR - 8 hours (hands on) (skill level - basic/intermediate)
The next scheduled class is set for Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at LA CLEAR in Commerce, Ca.
This training is for LE and military personnel. ID will be verified.
If you are working with images in an LE setting, this class is for you.
Click on the link for more details. Click here to see all the offerings at LA HIDTA Training.
This class has been approved for 8 hours of credit towards your LEVA certification or continuing education requirement.
The next scheduled class is set for Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at LA CLEAR in Commerce, Ca.
This training is for LE and military personnel. ID will be verified.
If you are working with images in an LE setting, this class is for you.
Click on the link for more details. Click here to see all the offerings at LA HIDTA Training.
This class has been approved for 8 hours of credit towards your LEVA certification or continuing education requirement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)