ComputerGenerated Evidence as Demonstrative or Substantive Evidence.docx

ComputerGenerated Evidence as Demonstrative or Substantive Evidence.docx

《ComputerGenerated Evidence as Demonstrative or Substantive Evidence.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ComputerGenerated Evidence as Demonstrative or Substantive Evidence.docx（128页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

ComputerGeneratedEvidenceasDemonstrativeorSubstantiveEvidence

AmericanJurisprudenceProofofFacts3d

DatabaseupdatedDecember2014

CategoricalListofArticles

EstablishingFoundationtoAdmitComputer-GeneratedEvidenceasDemonstrativeorSubstantiveEvidence

LauraWilkinsonSmalley,J.D.[*]

TABLEOFCONTENTS

ArticleOutline

Scope

Index

ResearchReferences

ARTICLEOUTLINE

IBackground

APreliminaryMatters

§1Introduction;scopeofarticle

§2Usesforcomputer-generatedevidence;ingeneral

§3Usesforcomputer-generatedevidence;ingeneral—Specificusesforcomputer-generatedevidence

§4Creatingandusingcomputergraphicsandanimation

BFoundationforAdmissionofComputer-GeneratedEvidence

§5Ingeneral

§6Computer-generatedevidencenotrequiringspecialconsideration

§7Challengestotrustworthinessofcomputer-generatedevidence

§7.5Reliability

CAdmissionofComputerAnimationsIntoEvidence

§8Contrastbetweenanimationsillustratinglayorexpertwitnesstestimonyandcomputersimulations

§9Admissionofcomputeranimations;ingeneral

§10Admissionofcomputeranimations;ingeneral—Legalstandard

DAdmissionofComputerSimulationsIntoEvidence

§11Ingeneral

§12Ingeneral—Useofexpertwitness

§13Admissionofcomputersimulationintoevidence

§14Admissionofcomputersimulationintoevidence—Layingfactualfoundation

§15Admissionofcomputersimulationintoevidence—Validityofunderlyingscientificortechnicaltheories

§16Admissionofcomputersimulationintoevidence—Authenticationofcomputerhardwareandsoftware

§17Admissionofcomputersimulationintoevidence—Trustworthinessofunderlyingmathematicalmodels

§18Prejudice

IIModelDiscovery

§19Discoveryconsiderations;ingeneral

§20Entitlementtodisclosure

§21Provisionsgoverningdiscoveryofunderlyinginformation

§22Plaintiff'sinterrogatoriestodefendant

§23Motioninliminetoexcludesimulationevidence

IIICreationandAdmissionofComputer-GeneratedEvidenceatTrial

§24Creationofanimationorsimulation;checklist

§25Admissionofcomputer-generatedattrial;checklist

IVAdmissionofComputerAnimationatTrial

ALayWitness

§26Introduction

§27Foundationforadmission

BExpertWitness

§28Qualifications

§29Backgroundregardingautopsy

§30Foundationforadmittingstillanimations

VAdmissionofComputerSimulationatTrial

§31Expertwitness;qualifications

§32Qualifyingexpert

ResearchReferences

TopicofArticle:

Establishingthefoundationnecessarytoadmitcomputer-generatedevidenceasdemonstrativeorsubstantiveevidenceattrial.

Thisissuemayariseinanycivilorcriminalactionwhereapartyseekstoillustrateevidenceforthejuryviacomputersimulationsoranimations,orwhereapartyoffersthesimulationoranimationassubstantiveevidencetoproveacrucialfactatissueinthelitigation.

INDEX

Accidentreconstruction,§§3,15

Admissionasevidence,§§25–32

Admissionsbyparties,§6

AdvancedDynamicVehicleSimulation（ADVS）,§15

Animations,generally,§§4,8–10,24–30

Audioofactualevent,usingwithsimulation,§10

Auralevidence,retentioncompared,§§2,3,18

Authentication,§§6,14,16

Backgrounddiscussion,§§1–18

Badfaithdestructionofevidence,§20

Balancingprobativevalueandprejudice,§18

Businessrecords,§4

CD-ROM,§4

Charts,graphs,anddiagrams,§6

Checklistsadmissionasevidence,§25

creatinganimationsorsimulations,§24

Copyingsimulation,discovery,§19

Costs,production,§4

Court'spretrialevaluation,§14

Criminaldefenseuses,§§2,3

Daubertrule,scientificevidence,§15

Defenseuses,§2

Definitions,§9

Demonstrativevssubstantiveevidence,§§7,10,11

Destructionofevidence,§20

Diagrams,§6

Disasters,§3

Discovery,§§19–23

Displayofprograms,§4

Do-it-yourselfapproach,§4

DVD,§4

Estimatingcosts,§4

Excludingsimulations,§23

Expertwitnesses,§§8,10,12,20,28–32

Factualfoundation,§14

Fairandaccuraterepresentation,standard,§§9,10

Foundation,generally,§§5–7

Fryetest,scientificevidence,§15

Generalacceptancestandard,scientificevidence,§15

Graphs,§6

Hardwareauthentication,§16

Hearsay,§§4,7

Illustrativevssubstantiveevidence,§§7,10,11

Influentialimpact,§§2,18

Inputdatadiscovery,§21

Inputdataverification,§16

Interrogatories,§22

Introductiontoarticle,§1

Juryinfluence,§§2,3,18

Laserdisk,§4

Laywitness,animation,§§26,27

Liminemotions,§23

Maps,§5

Mathematicaltrustworthiness,§17

Modeldiscovery,§§19–23

Motionsinlimine,§23

Naturaldisasters,§3

Oralevidence,retentioncompared,§§2,3,18

Outputdata,discovery,§20

Patentlitigation,§3

Prejudicialeffect,§18

Presentationmedia,§4

Pretrialevaluationbycourt,§14

Printouts,businessrecords,§6

Professionalanimationfirms,§4

Protectiveordersindiscovery,§20

Qualifyingexpertwitness,§§31,32

Reconstructingaccidents,§§3,15

Relevance,§§14,18

Reliability,§§7,17

Reportofexpert,discovery,§20

Retentionincrease,jurors,§§2,3,18

Rulesofevidence,§5

Sampleinterrogatories,§22

Sanctions,discovery,§20

Scientificbasis,§§15,17

Scopeofarticle,§1

Simulations,generally,§§8,11–18,23–25,31,32

Softwareauthentication,§16

Sophisticationofcourtroom,electronic,§4

Standardsforadmission,§9

Storeddata,discovery,§20

Substantialsimilaritystandard,§§10,14

Substantivevsillustrativeevidence,§§7,10,11

Sufficiencyofunderlyingfactualbasis,§14

Suppressingsimulations,§23

Techniquesofanimation,§4

Technologicalsophisticationofcourtroom,§4

Theoryvalidity,§15

Third-partygraphicssoftware,§4

Trustworthiness,§§7,17

Underlyingdata,discovery,§21

Underlyingfactualbasis,sufficiency,§14

Usesofcomputer-generatedevidence,generally,§§2,3

Visualimpact,§§2,3,18

Weighingprobativevalueandprejudice,§18

I.Background

A.PreliminaryMatters

§1.Introduction;scopeofarticle

[CumulativeSupplement]

Thisarticlediscusseshowtoestablishingthefoundationnecessarytoadmitcomputer-generatedevidence,includinganimationsorsimulations,asdemonstrativeorsubstantiveevidenceattrial.Thissituationmayariseinanycivilorcriminalaction,whereapartyseekstoillustrateevidenceforthejuryviacomputersimulationsoranimations,orwhereapartyoffersthesimulationoranimationassubstantiveevidencetoproveacrucialfactatissueinthelitigation.Generally,theissueofhowtoadmitcomputer-generatedevidenceattrialwillbegintosurfaceduringexpertdisclosure,whereapartywillhavetodecidehowandwhentheuseofcomputeranimationsorcomputersimulationswillbedisclosedtotheotherside.Often,acomputer-generateddemonstration,simulationoranimationwillbethesubjectofamotioninlimine,wheretheproponentoftheevidenceseekstoensureitsadmission,or,moreoften,wheretheopposingpartywillseektoprecludeadmissionofthatevidence.

Thisarticlewilldiscussallaspectsofadmittingcomputer-generatedanimations,simulationsandothercomputer-generateddemonstrationsintoevidence,fromageneraldiscussionoftheusesofcomputer-generatedevidence,[1]creatingtheanimationorsimulation,[2]evidentiaryconsiderations,[3]anddiscoveryconsiderations,[4]includingamotioninliminetoprohibittheuseofcomputer-generatedevidenceortoensureitsadmissionattrial.[5]Checklistsregardingthecreationofananimationorasimulation[6]andtheadmissionofcomputer-generatedattrial[7]areprovided.thearticleconcludeswithsampletestimonyusedtolaythefoundationfortheadmissionofacomputeranimation[8]andacomputersimulation[9]attrial.

CUMULATIVESUPPLEMENT

A.L.R.Library

AdmissibilityofComputer-GeneratedAnimation,111A.L.R.5th529

Cases:

Discretionistheenduringconstant:

Althoughdemonstrativeevidencehasevolvedfromstillphotographs,tofilms,colorslides,videotapes,andcomputer-generateddemonstrations,thetrialjudgemuststillexercisesounddiscretionindeterminingwhethertheprofferedevidenceisrelevantandiftheprobativevalueissubstantiallyoutweighedbythedangerofunfairprejudice.RulesofEvid.,Rules401,403.Eckmanv.Moore,876So.2d975（Miss.2004）;West'sKeyNumberDigest,Equity

188.

Computer-generatedanimationevidence,whichwascreatedbymurderdefendant'sexpertwitnessandadmittedfordemonstrativepurposesonly,shouldnothavebeengiventothejuryforitsconsiderationduringdeliberations.Coxv.State,849So.2d1257（Miss.2003）;West'sKeyNumberDigest,CriminalLaw

858（3）.

Videoanimationandotherdemonstrativeevidencethatsummarize,orperhapsemphasize,testimonyareadmissibleiftheunderlyingtestimonyhasbeenadmittedintoevidence,orissubsequentlyadmittedintoevidence.NorthAmericanVanLines,Inc.v.Emmons,50S.W.3d103（Tex.App.Beaumont2001）,reh'goverruled,（Aug.9,2001）andRule53.7（f）motionfiled,（Sept.19,2001）;West'sKeyNumberDigest,Evidence

150.

                    [TopofSection]                

[ENDOFSUPPLEMENT]

§2.Usesforcomputer-generatedevidence;ingeneral

[CumulativeSupplement]

Whilenotallcasesareassensationalastheonesdescribedbelow,computergraphicscanhaveadramaticimpactinthecourtroom.Acomputeranimationusedtoillustrateanexpert'stestimonyrecreatedahexaneexplosionintheLouisville,Kentuckysewersystem.Theexpert,achemicalengineer,testifiedthatpollutionfromaRalstonPurinaplantcausedthedisaster,andacomputeranimationillustratedhistheoryofthecase.Afterthejurywasshownthevideo,RalstonPurinasettledformorethan$68milliondollars.[1]WhileRalsonPurina'struemotivesinsettlingareunknown