NCJ Number
45649
Date Published
1977
Length
31 pages
Annotation
A SUMMARY AND BRIEF ANALYSIS OF COURT USE OF VIDEO RECORDING AND LIVE CLOSED-CIRCUIT TELEVISION (CCTV) TO RECORD AND PRESENT EVIDENCE, TO RECORD DEPOSITION OF A WITNESS, AND TO RECORD AND PRESERVE TRIALS IS GIVEN.
Abstract
THE USE OF VIDEOTAPE PRESENTATION OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE IS RECOGNIZED AND CODIFIED IN THE 1975 AMENDMENT TO RULE 1001 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE. ITS USE HAS INCREASED OVER THE PAST DECADE. VIDEOTAPE CAN PROVIDE MORE ECONOMICAL, EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT, AND COMPLETE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE THAN WOULD BE OTHERWISE POSSIBLE. WHILE CASES INVOLVING THE USE OF VIDEOTAPED EVIDENCE HAVE BEEN APPEALED, NO MERIT HAS YET BEEN ACCORDED ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE EVIDENTIARY USE OF VIDEOTAPE ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS. PROCEDURAL BARRIERS TO THE USE OF VIDEOTAPE FOR RECORDING WITNESS TESTIMONY HAVE BEEN STEADILY DECREASING SINCE THE 1970 CHANGE IN THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PERMITTING THE RECORDING OF DEPOSITIONS BY OTHER THAN STENOGRAPHIC MEANS, AND VIDEOTAPE PRESENTATION IS NOW GENERALLY REGARDED AS PREFERABLE TO READING A TRANSCRIPT OF UNAVAILABLE WITNESSES' TESTIMONY. RESEARCH COMPARING DIFFERENT METHODS OF TESTIMONY PRESENTATION FOUND AUDIOTAPE, BLACK/WHITE OR COLOR VIDEOTAPE, AND LIVE PRESENTATION PREFERABLE TO A READ TRANSCRIPT. THE USE OF VIDEOTAPE IS USUALLY CONSIDERED TO PREVENT TRIAL DELAY OTHERWISE NECESSITATED BY WITNESS UNAVAILABILITY. IN ADDITION EDITING OF INADMISSABLE TESTIMONY CAN PREVENT JUROR CONFUSION OR BIASING. HOWEVER, THE EFFECTS OF VIDEOTAPING ON WITNESS VERACITY, WITNESS/JUROR PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE, AND JUROR DECISIONMAKING HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY RESEARCHED. PROCEDURES FOR VIDEOTAPING ALSO MAY HAVE A BIASING EFFECT. TO GUIDE VIDEOTAPING PRACTICES, THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER HAS PUBLISHED GUIDELINES FOR PRERECORDING WITNESS TESTIMONY. IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED THAT THE POSSIBLE ENTERTAINMENT VALUE, THE LACK OF PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS, REMOVAL OF JURORS IN TIME AND SPACE FROM THE WITNESS, AND THE POTENTIAL FOR DISTORTION MAY BE INHERENTLY PREJUDICIAL AND DENY THE DEFENDANT HIS RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL. SEVERAL PROJECTS UTILIZING VIDEOTAPE RECORDING OF TRIAL PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT FOUND IT TO BE AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR STENOGRAPHIC RECORDING. CCTV AND VIDEO-TELEPHONE HAVE NOT BEEN EXTENSIVELY USED, ALTHOUGH THEY MAY PERMIT PRESS VIEWING, PRESENT A METHOD FOR DEALING WITH DISRUPTIVE DEFENDENTS, AND MAY SAVE TRAVEL TIME AND COSTS. WHILE OVERCOMING MANY OF THE PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN VIDEOTAPED PRESENTATIONS, CCTV EFFECTS ON JUROR DECISIONMAKING AND TRIAL INTEGRITY HAVE NOT BEEN ASSESSED. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT FURTHER RESEARCH WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE VIDEO TECHNOLOGY MAY BE INCORPORATED INTO THE JUDICIAL PROCESS SO THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE BENEFITS OF ITS USE MAY BE REALIZED WITHOUT UNACCEPTABLE EFFECTS ON THE PROCESS OF JUSTICE. (JAP)