Can you use dash cameras recordings for evidence?

pump

can anyone tell me for sure if dash cameras can or can’t be used in court for evidence of a crash etc. and if insurance companies will accept them as evidence?

Some people tell me yes and others say not but where will I find out for sure?

Gumbo

aslong as its not edited in anyway, and you have the origianl video clip available for inspection by garda/insurance technical division, i should see no issues.

Its the same as shops giving cctv clips for help in shop lifting or their external surroundings.

listermint

Give the evidence to your insurer. That way you will know for sure.

There are no posters on here that are your insurer so they cannot answer a question on their behalf.

pump

I know that. Don’t have a claim or anything just wondering if any one in here had experience in them

biko

Did a quick google but didn't see anything that points to dash cam footage having been used in court in Ireland, yet.

pump

I did the same myself which leads me to believe they not accepted by courts or insurance companies.

I use one in my truck as I do be out foreign and use it in case I was in an accident at least it would cover me to the company I work for or maybe to foreign cops.

Was thinking of mounting a permanent camera to my car but no point paying 200/300euro if this not accepted to insurance or courts god forbid something did happen.

Thought someone in here would know or be able to point me to a website regarding the legal side of them

listermint

pump wrote: »

I did the same myself which leads me to believe they not accepted by courts or insurance companies.

I use one in my truck as I do be out foreign and use it in case I was in an accident at least it would cover me to the company I work for or maybe to foreign cops.

Was thinking of mounting a permanent camera to my car but no point paying 200/300euro if this not accepted to insurance or courts god forbid something did happen.

Thought someone in here would know or be able to point me to a website

I would assume every little helps and this would certainly standup if any criminal matters where to arise. Police would be very interested in such evidence. Insurance companies however are a different breed. So still would be a savey investment.

Tallon

I have been informed by a station Sargent that my footage may not be taken into account in court! It is entirely up to the judge

trad

The Gardai use their dash cams as evidence all the time

Gumbo

biko wrote: »

Did a quick google but didn't see anything that points to dash cam footage having been used in court in Ireland, yet.

Maybe the video footage was enough for one side of the argument to back down and not proceed into court on the basis that the video would be harmful to their account?

Interesting topic alright, i'd imagine every little helps if/when you need it.

Gumbo

Hers an extract from a presentation from a Consulting Forensic Engineer :

• High Definition CCTV has transformed the claim experience of important sectors
such as Supermarkets, Dublin Bus and Night Clubs. It enables prompt decisions to
be made on liability and has apparently dramatically reduced the number of claims
in these sectors. I know a very large night club where every point of the dance
floor is covered by two cameras
• However like all powerful tools it has great dangers and can equally prove the
other side’s case.
• CCTV must be forensically reviewed in the light of the plaintiff’s evidence with a
written log - a slow and tedious process.
• Do we see the cleaners that are supposed to patrol every 15 minutes?
• Any discrepancies in the CCTV can weigh heavily against a defendant
• Unlike the old tape systems (the tapes were always mislaid) it can be
inadvertently? edited without it being obvious.
• Further many modern systems appear to have a fixed number of frames a second
or are motion activated. Crucial seconds can be lost without it being obvious and
such missing seconds can only raise doubts in the mind of a judge. However many
multicamera systems ‘drop’ frames if two images arrive at once etc. Invariably the
dropped frame is the critical one.

OK, its based on a nightclub situation, but the same principles could apply?

Richard tea

Not sure but I think any footage will need a watermark

b318isp

I would imagine that in a civil case it could be used as evidence, but for a criminal case it would be much less certain. If the camera was handed over to the guards at the time of the incidents and the chain of custody proven, then it might be admissible.

There would need to be clear data to support a link between the two parties involved (e.g. date, identification, etc.) - remember that the burden of proof is very different between civil and criminal law.

But, I'm no expert.

coylemj

CCTV footage from shops is used in courts all the time and is as reliable as a dashcam in that there is a video stream being recorded on to digital media. A clock on the screen that allows anyone viewing the film to verify that they are watching a continuous, unbroken record of a given perdiod of time is all you need.

I was on a jury once in a serious trial and we were shown several clips of CCTV cameras from different shops, not one of them was challenged by the defence.

However in the case of a dashcam video provided by one side to a dispute, it would be open to the defence in a criminal trial to suggest to the jury that the video could have been manipulated to produce a few seconds that favoured the prosecution case but with an insurance claim, the insurance company would have no truck with that kind of nonsense and unless there was obvious break in the film, they would accept it as a true record of what happened.

Motor accidents are over in a matter of seconds, without a movie set and lots of trained drivers, it would be virtually impossible to fake the video evidence so I really can't see why there should be an issue here.

Set the dashcam to show the time on the screen all the time and your movie will be acceptable anywhere.

Tallon

But you can just record video without the time stamp and then add it in later, so your argument is void

ironclaw

trad wrote: »

The Gardai use their dash cams as evidence all the time

Big difference in how it is recorded. You can get evidence worthy recorders that will impose the time stamp and can be verified (i.e Hash algorithm, sealed unit, encryption etc) Thats why Polaroid was the only accepted film type in court for a long time as you couldn't fake it.

The only way I could see a DashCam being allowed into evidence would be if the chain of evidence was unbroken i.e. It was taken as evidence at the scene and a copy made in an evidence kosher environment. Remember even placing an SD card in your computer causes a write operation on the card (Even if you do nothing to the card) that can make it void as evidence. Digital evidence is a huge field and a nightmare to ensure its not tampered with even inadvertently. That or it was viewed by all parties and they agreed it was as per the events.

That said, I would imagine any insurance company would be happy to see it and the judge in question may allow it. Depends on the severity of the case I suppose.

coylemj

Tallon wrote: »

But you can just record video without the time stamp and then add it in later, so your argument is void

'Void' is a bit harsh. As long as the video shows a continuous event with no breaks then it will be acceptable. A car crash isn't something that can be easily reproduced with all of the participants so the actual time it happened isn't usually in dispute.

On CCTV videos the Gardai are often interested in the time that someone passed a shop and in that type of situation, the timestamp is critical. With a car crash or motorway 'incident' it is not and as long as the video has no breaks in it it should be acceptable to anyone as a true record of what happened.

You can touch up a still photograph no problem with Picasa, Photoshop etc., a movie is a whole different ballgame. The h/w and s/w you would need to doctor a movie cost an awful lot of money which is outside the budget of most people.

Conmaicne Mara

CCTV needs a watermark to be taken in any way seriously, also needs date and time I think.

I would imagine, the best use of dashcam would be at the scene if the other party tell tall tales. Don't say you have one until they have told their side to the cop, then show the footage.

I wouldn't like to be relying on it either way.

Gumbo

ok, so its UK law, but :

"The original is the data first recorded in memory. Thus any printed or displayed image created from these is a copy. Consequently digital recording technology provides no original that could be produced in evidence. All that is available for evidence is a copy of the first, probably temporary, recording in memory, and this will be admissible as evidence. Its weight as evidence will depend on proper authentication and other matters".

In the case of a digital camera, it is probable that the original would be the digital file representing the image. This would be stored on a memory chip or series of chips and immediately transferred to some other form of storage (hard disc, etc.) and the memory chip being overwritten with the next image. "This does not represent a problem under the Law of England and Wales because if the original of a document no longer exists, copies or even copies of copies are admissible as evidence and it is irrelevant that the original was destroyed by the person seeking to produce the copy as evidence. Nor is it a problem in Scotland because although the general rule that copies of documents are admissible whether or not the originals still exist does not apply to visual images, copies of a document which no longer exists are admissible under the best evidence rule. The fact that a document is a copy goes to its weight as evidence, not its admissibility. It will therefore be necessary for the user to be able to give evidence of the procedures used for generating, processing and storing digital images. So as to be able to prove that the image produced to the court is an accurate copy of the original". ....In general the court is likely to admit the evidence, the judge will direct the jury on the weight they should consider attaching to it.

http://www.cctv-information.co.uk/i/Digital_Images_as_Evidence

OK, so dash cams are not going to be the be all and end all in a court case, but it may provide enough evidence to stop that person from fraudently claiming from you, or stating that you pulled out in front of them etc

And the dash cam footage, once shown to both parties, even before court, maybe in the process of a claim could decide an outcome before its even thought about court proceedings.

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

CCTV needs a watermark to be taken in any way seriously

What is this watermark that people refer to?

JJJJNR

Don't CCTV cameras need to be registered with the Garda.

coylemj

kceire wrote: »

ok, so its UK law, but :

.....

It's not law at all, it's a series of selctive quotes from a parliamentary committee report and it's 16 years old. Note that 'House of Lords' in this case does not mean the court of final appeal as was in the UK before Tony Blair created the Supreme Court, it's the science and technology committee of the bigger House of Lords.

There may be an onus on the prosceution to provide an audit trail in the case of digital evidence but when it comes to you defending yourself in a prosecution after an 'incident' you have recorded, or to backup your side of the story in an insurance claim, no such onus would apply to you and a dashcam recording could be used by you in court or supplied to your insurance ceompany and I seriously doubt that anyone is going to question whether it was manipulated or not.

ironclaw

coylemj wrote: »

There may be an onus on the prosceution to provide an audit trail in the case of digital evidence but when it comes to you defending yourself in a prosecution after an 'incident' you have recorded, or to backup your side of the story in an insurance claim, no such onus would apply to you and a dashcam recording could be used by you in court or supplied to your insurance ceompany and I seriously doubt that anyone is going to question whether it was manipulated or not.

Your assuming the evidence i.e the dashcam is allowable into the evidence. It may not be. So no one has to challenge it if you can't use it in the first place. Its very easy to cast reasonable doubt on anything produced digitally i.e. If you don't mention it at the side of the road, If the Garda in question doesn't note it down, if you don't immediately surrender it as evidence, if you don't provide it to the other party, if you can't categorically prove its evidence sound etc etc. You can't just turn up with a dash cam and expect it to be allowed in the court.

Victor

Courts have been willing to accept video, with conditions. They will want a chain of evidence and they will need an sworn affidavit from the photographer that what is on the video is a true record of what happened. There was a case where an RTÉ camera man was attacked when filming a funeral and the judge admitted the video.

The other side can challenge the evidence, in particular if it looks like it has been tampered with or is misleading, e.g. poor angle you have a dashcam, but where hit from behind. Note that while you can Photoshop an image, to make things look different, doing so to such a degree that the tell-tales aren't visible is seriously difficult, especially when you multiply it by dozens, hundreds or thousands of images on a video.

Having the video is better than not having it. I imagine most parties would back down when faced with adverse video evidence.

Henry Ford III

I can't see why dash cam video couldn't be offered in evidence. Obviously it'd be subject to challenge.

ironclaw

Victor wrote: »

Having the video is better than not having it. I imagine most parties would back down when faced with adverse video evidence.

That would be my line. You supply a copy to your and the other parties insurance. And let them fight it out. If its gone to court then its probably beyond a simple cut and dry case.

Crocked

Mate was in a crash which involved multiple cars a couple of weeks ago. One of the first questions the Gardai asked all drivers when they got to the scene was had any of them dash cams or other video of the incident. Now whether they could have used it in a court or only use it to help with their investigation I'm not sure. Assuming that if anyone had had video evidence and the SD card given there and then to the Gardai, I cant see why a judge wouldn't allow it.

coylemj

ironclaw wrote: »

Your assuming the evidence i.e the dashcam is allowable into the evidence. It may not be. So no one has to challenge it if you can't use it in the first place. Its very easy to cast reasonable doubt on anything produced digitally i.e. If you don't mention it at the side of the road, If the Garda in question doesn't note it down, if you don't immediately surrender it as evidence, if you don't provide it to the other party, if you can't categorically prove its evidence sound etc etc. You can't just turn up with a dash cam and expect it to be allowed in the court.

Yes you can.

If I intended to use it in evidence I certainly would not surrender it at the side of the road, nor would I even admit to it's existence - why should I?

Since when does the defence have to hand over their evidence before the court case?

coylemj

coylemj wrote: »

Yes you can.

If I intended to use it in evidence I certainly would not surrender it at the side of the road, nor would I even admit to it's existence - why should I?

Since when does the defence have to hand over their evidence before the court case?

Could it go against you if a Gardaí asked if anyone had footage, you said no, and then produced it for court?

At the end of the day, it's down to the judge. I recently got footage of a security guard being thrown out of a moving car which trying to restrain someone. I burned it to a DVD and gave it to the shop the security guard was from. I doubt it would be useable in court, since I never left my details, however, the reg of the car involved in the incident was clearly visible, so it may have helped the Gardaí with their investigations of the incident. I didn't upload the footage as I wasn't sure if that would make it inadmissible if it was allowed in court.

pump

well i have e-mailed my Insurance company and the traffic section of an garda siochana so will let you know if I get a response from them

jamie72

pump wrote: »

I did the same myself which leads me to believe they not accepted by courts or insurance companies.

I use one in my truck as I do be out foreign and use it in case I was in an accident at least it would cover me to the company I work for or maybe to foreign cops.

Was thinking of mounting a permanent camera to my car but no point paying 200/300euro if this not accepted to insurance or courts god forbid something did happen.

Thought someone in here would know or be able to point me to a website

You can buy crappy ones for around €35 from dealextreme. They aren't the best, but they are better than nothing.

coylemj

Deleted User wrote: »

Could it go against you if a Gardaí asked if anyone had footage, you said no, and then produced it for court?

If you have evidence that would tend to show that you are in the right then you have every right to hang on to it as at the time it is the only copy and the Gardai could conveniently 'lose' it.

If a Garda demanded that I hand over the SD card, I would simply tell him that it might be incriminating and I was invoking my Common Law to right to decline to hand it over as he could use it in evidence against me.

If he then insisted under threat of arrest, I'd probably give it to him but he would not be allowed to use it in a court case because it would be inadmissible, having been obtained under duress.

If the cops can't look after cash and drugs that they have seized and locked up in a 'secure' room in the station, what chance is there that several months after the event, the Garda will walk into court and produce your SD card? Pretty slim I'd say.

slimjimmc

JJJJNR wrote: »

Don't CCTV cameras need to be registered with the Garda.

Nope. CCTV installers who work on domestic or commercial premises do have to be licenced by the PSA though.

georgefalls

Tallon wrote: »

But you can just record video without the time stamp and then add it in later, so your argument is void

Not entirely accurate. The original footage will contain "Meta Data". That will show the day and time it was taken. Adding to it afterwards will also produce meta data, of when the addition was made.

ironclaw

georgefalls wrote: »

Not entirely accurate. The original footage will contain "Meta Data". That will show the day and time it was taken. Adding to it afterwards will also produce meta data, of when the addition was made.

Meta data can be easily faked as it is digital. The only way to ensure data integrity is either on-the-fly encryption or the ability to hash it.

Whitewater-AGS

coylemj wrote: »

If you have evidence that would tend to show that you are in the right then you have every right to hang on to it as at the time it is the only copy and the Gardai could conveniently 'lose' it.

If a Garda demanded that I hand over the SD card, I would simply tell him that it might be incriminating and I was invoking my Common Law to right to decline to hand it over as he could use it in evidence against me.

If he then insisted under threat of arrest, I'd probably give it to him but he would not be allowed to use it in a court case because it would be inadmissible, having been obtained under duress.

If the cops can't look after cash and drugs that they have seized and locked up in a 'secure' room in the station, what chance is there that several months after the event, the Garda will walk into court and produce your SD card? Pretty slim I'd say.

Non admissible as its detained under duress, what a load of pony, Dpp-V-bradish, that case law states all video evidence must be collected.

Wossack

georgefalls wrote: »

Not entirely accurate. The original footage will contain "Meta Data". That will show the day and time it was taken. Adding to it afterwards will also produce meta data, of when the addition was made.

good thing we've all got tamperproff atomic clocks collectively sync'd together - else this statement would be baloney