Is Video from Handheld Devices Helpful to Criminal Defense Cases? The Answer Can Be Complicated

Cell phones have become absolutely necessary for the majority of daily activities for almost everyone since the 1990s digital explosion. Our social and professional lives now center around the usage of computers, smart phones, and especially the internet to stay in touch 24/7.

Can digital video evidence obtained from portable devices be used in court, nevertheless, when a crime is committed and filmed on a cell phone? Isn’t that a violation of privacy? Keep reading to find the answers and contact Chambers Law Firm at 714-760-4088 if you have been charged with a crime and require help from a criminal defense attorney.

Perhaps a Subpoena is Required

To ensure that evidence will be admitted in court, crime investigators must follow the correct steps to obtain access to it. To obtain the massive amounts of data a person’s cell phone gives, including social media accounts, GPS coordinates, photographs, Google Maps location history, and much more, they may gather it at the crime scene or later subpoena a specific mobile device account.

A Handheld Device Can Either Save Or Damn a Defendant

When it comes to demonstrating someone’s guilt or innocence in a criminal prosecution, digital evidence can be of enormous significance. It might completely contradict or support eyewitness testimony. Yet, the difficulty with using a handheld gadget as evidence is that it can be easily falsified.

Hacking, skimming, and other methods of altering digital evidence are ubiquitous, and nowadays, accessing and changing the information on a device may be done remotely from any location without the person actually having it in their hands.

Digital Evidence Is Prone to Legal Issues

Digital evidence also has the issue of easily straddling multiple legal jurisdictions. State-by-state differences in the laws governing the investigation, processing, and prosecution of crimes make it possible for evidence obtained by mobile devices to be easily deleted, altered, or otherwise rendered useless.

Data ownership can also be a tricky issue because it is possible for someone to reveal the password to their email account, for instance, but if it has been hacked by a third party, it may contain a variety of spam and fake information that has nothing to do with the true owner of the phone. Prosecutors must establish a direct connection between the owner of the phone and the information on it, which is frequently very difficult to do.

When It Comes to Electronic Information, Privacy Rules and Practices Are Ambiguous

When sending emails and making phone calls, the majority of Americans expect to have some kind of privacy, but when sending texts and using social media, they have lesser expectations. When it comes to digital information, cultural norms and legal precedents around privacy are a little unclear. When it comes to digital information and the rules of each state, privacy regulations can be interpreted in a variety of ways, leaving attorneys and judges in a legal limbo.

In Some Cases, Video Evidence Is Not Admissible in Court

Although video evidence from surveillance cameras and mobile devices is increasingly popular in courtrooms around the country, there are still several circumstances in which video evidence is not allowed in criminal court cases.

Police detectives must determine and demonstrate to the court where the video originated, how it was captured, who is responsible for maintaining the equipment, and how precisely it relates to the matter at hand for it to be considered admissible evidence in court. When video evidence is properly gathered, stored, and validated, it is likely to be admissible at a criminal trial, but it is never guaranteed.

Call Chambers Law Firm at 714-760-4088 to hire the top criminal defense attorney in Southern California if you’re facing charges. Call right away to arrange a free consultation.

.
Call Us Today