Are digital pictures allowed in to to court or only 35mm film..

[idontknow08]

I would like to know if digital pictures allowed in to to court for proof or not.

Someone told me today (not a cop or attorney) that 35mm film with negatives are the only thing courts allow in to evidence, I would like to know if that is true or not.

He said the reason why that was is becasue it's too easy to photoshop digital pictures, is this true.

I know this is not ask an attorney but I figure officers would know the answer to this because they take lots of pictures for court.

I would like to know do you guys use digital pictures or 35mm film with negatives for your cases?

FYI, we are talking about photographs for a civil case in GA.

[ngcsubutterbar]

My county, (Richmond County, GA) used digital cameras with removable 3.5" floppy disks. Those disks are then taken from the camera and treated as evidence with all the applicable rules in chain of custody, etc. Never had a case where photo's I took went to trial though, just wasn't there long enough and didn't have a need to take too many photos.

[Citicop]

We also use digital cameras with removable "SD" memory cards. They can be used in court with no problems, provided you can show a chain of custody.

-Citicop.

[Roger Dat]

Digital is allowed in our court.

[idontknow08]

Thanks for the replies guys, as always you are helpful.

For a private citizen taking pictures for a civil case what would be your advise be, go with 35mm with negatives or digital?

If that question does not go over well let me ask this.

If you were involved in a civil case of your own, would you bring 35mm with negatives or digital picture to court?

[phantasm]

we use digital for domestics. digital is definitely allowed in court.

[mcsap]

Our SERIOUS crime scenes are done in film , digital and video. Lesser scenes are typically done in digital.

I have a trial Tuesday where a tractor trailer and a motorcycle collided. The MC driver was killed. The truck had violations on it that did not contribute to the crash yet were serious enough to cause it to be towed ( not from the damage).

I took 32 pics with my digital, put them onto a CD myself which I will be using in court.

[retdetsgt]

Even with pictures from film, you have to testify that the pictures accurately depict the scene. If you screw around with photoshop, you're looking at perjury.

[greenlead]

Remember, Photoshop just made it easier to manipulate images. People have been manipulating images in darkrooms since the invention of film.

[BP348]

My county, (Richmond County, GA) used digital cameras with removable 3.5" floppy disks. Those disks are then taken from the camera and treated as evidence with all the applicable rules in chain of custody, etc.

+1

Except ummmm it's not Richmond County it's USBP ;)

We use pictures all the time to show narcotic & Alien concealment before & after pics

[highwayman]

I would like to know if digital pictures allowed in to to court for proof or not.

Someone told me today (not a cop or attorney) that 35mm film with negatives are the only thing courts allow in to evidence, I would like to know if that is true or not.

He said the reason why that was is becasue it's too easy to photoshop digital pictures, is this true.

I know this is not ask an attorney but I figure officers would know the answer to this because they take lots of pictures for court.

I would like to know do you guys use digital pictures or 35mm film with negatives for your cases?

FYI, we are talking about photographs for a civil case in GA.

Digital video footage and digital snapshots are acceptable as evidence in courts here in CA.

Yes it is easy to manipulate pics with Photoshop but in shoplifting cases like ours what's the point, after we catch the thief with the stolen merchandice pics are only used as supporting evidence and proof.

And besides why risk putting in jeopardy a good relationship with the courts and LEO's just to win a case by presenting false evidence... not smart.

[highwayman]

I would like to know if digital pictures allowed in to to court for proof or not.

Someone told me today (not a cop or attorney) that 35mm film with negatives are the only thing courts allow in to evidence, I would like to know if that is true or not.

He said the reason why that was is becasue it's too easy to photoshop digital pictures, is this true.

I know this is not ask an attorney but I figure officers would know the answer to this because they take lots of pictures for court.

I would like to know do you guys use digital pictures or 35mm film with negatives for your cases?

FYI, we are talking about photographs for a civil case in GA.

Digital video footage and digital snapshots are acceptable as evidence in courts here in CA.

Yes it is easy to manipulate pics with Photoshop but in shoplifting cases like ours what's the point, after we catch the thief with the stolen merchandice pics are only used as supporting evidence and proof.

And besides why risk putting in jeopardy a good relationship (that took a long time to built) with the courts and LEO's just to win a case by presenting falsified evidence... not smart.