Caught You On Camera? Video Evidence Isn't Always Enough

Lewis & Laws, PLLC is backed by more than four decades of combined experience, a quality that you cannot find at all defense law firms.

  • Home
  • Blog
  • Caught You On Camera? Video Evidence Isn't Always Enough

Get a FREE case review now.

We are available 24/7 to take your call. (206) 209-0608

May 10

Lewis & Laws

Caught You On Camera? Video Evidence Isn't Always Enough

by Lewis & Laws

Caught You On Camera? Video Evidence Isn't Always Enough

In the modern age, surveillance cameras are practically everywhere. Look up on any given street corner around Seattle and you may find a watchful digital eye, spying on the movements of unsuspecting civilians on the sidewalk. And while it’s debatable whether cameras make for good crime deterrents, the fact is that many court cases include video surveillance footage as evidence.

But even if you’ve been allegedly caught on camera, technicalities and other mitigating factors may lead to your case being dismissed. Here are a few examples of situations where video evidence wasn’t enough to convict.

The video evidence was improperly obtained

Just like all evidence, tape collected by a surveillance camera must be properly obtained by law enforcement for it to be admissible in court. That means that typically, the police need a warrant to acquire the evidence—without one, the evidence itself, and any discoveries it may lead to, could be thrown out.

In a recent case right here in Washington, this was made expressly clear by a judge.

Techdirt explains the case as such:

Without a warrant, police installed a video camera on a nearby utility pole and aimed it at Vargas' front yard. After over a month of recording, the police got lucky: Vargas, an undocumented immigrant, decided to perform target practice in the front yard of his rural Washington home. This gave officers the probable cause they needed (illegal weapons possession) to search Vargas' house. The resulting search uncovered drugs and guns, leading to his arrest and indictment.

Though the surveillance video seemed damning—and it allegedly gave police a reason to enter the defendant’s home—Judge Edward Shea had good reason for throwing it (and all subsequent evidence collected as a result) out:

Law enforcement's warrantless and constant covert video surveillance of Defendant's rural front yard is contrary to the public's reasonable expectation of privacy and violates Defendant's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search. The video evidence and fruit of the video evidence are suppressed.

The video evidence actually led to acquittal or dismissal

A recent case in Miami proved that video evidence isn’t always a slam-dunk for the prosecution. A man who was arrested for brandishing a weapon was released after a judge reviewed the surveillance video and found that the man who was arrested was actually defending himself.

Though video evidence can sometimes be extremely damaging to a case, in some instances (like this one), details caught on camera may actually be beneficial for defendants. Whether it’s a technicality of language (like in this retail theft case) or an extenuating circumstance, video evidence isn’t always the end of the story.

The video evidence is in some way flawed

Video evidence is often seen as bulletproof in court, in large part because of the assumption that it must be true. However, one minor—but common—issue can severely damage the integrity of video footage: the timestamp.

Almost everyone has forgotten to reset their car’s clock after Daylight Saving Time. Similarly, home or even business security cameras may have the incorrect time or even date on their timestamp—which is all it takes to throw reasonable doubt on the time or date of a suspect’s actions. According to the FBI, this is a major reason why video evidence may be found inadmissible.

Video evidence may sound threatening when you’ve been charged with a crime, but that’s not always the last word. Depending on what’s on the tape and how it was obtained, your legal defense team can still build a case on your behalf. You deserve a fair trial, regardless of the evidence against you. Obtain legal counsel quickly to make sure you get it.

If You’ve Been Charged with A Crime in Seattle, Contact the Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyers at Baker, Lewis, Schwisow & Laws

The expert defense team at Baker, Lewis, Schwisow & Laws, PLLC vigorously defend the rights of individuals facing a multitude of charges in Seattle, Bellevue, and Kirkland. Contact us today at 206.209.0608 or fill out our online contact form to get more information or to get a free case review!



GET ANSWERS
Get answers

Should I plead guilty?

Once you plead guilty to a charge, you cannot change your plea afterwards, so it always advised that you talk with a criminal defense attorney at our firm before you do this. Pleading guilty means that you are admitting your conduct is punishable by the law and you know...

Why do I need a lawyer?

A criminal charge means that you could face sanctions including jail times, fines, probation, potential loss of your driver's license and other penalties. A skilled criminal defense attorney can guide you through the court process and advocate your position in order...

April 17, 2024

Life After an Arrest: How to Minimize the Impact on Your Future

An arrest can be a life-altering event, leaving you overwhelmed and uncertain about the future. Whether you've been charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, the consequences of an arrest can...

April 3, 2024

Understanding the Different Courts in Seattle: Municipal, District, and...

If you are facing legal troubles in Seattle, navigating the court system can feel overwhelming. To help you better understand what to expect, you should understand the types of courts in...