Cameras at the house. Yes.”
[/quote]
Well there ya go then
10 Likes
I doubt the prosecutor will need any audios or videos to make his case.
1 Like
Oh, this has gotten fun now!! I can’t wait for tomorrow!
1 Like
QFP
2 Likes
I assume the reason she states the prosecutor won’t use audio or video is because it would totally exonerate Barisone. But the defense sure will!
8 Likes
Or maybe inadmissible.
9 Likes
Time will tell. Hope it’s available online! Might have to take 3 weeks off for watch parties!
1 Like
when it’s the defense
1 Like
More on this taken from an attorney webpage. This may be relevant to civil and not criminal cases. I am just not sure.
Photo and Video Evidence: Always Admissible in Court?
Photo and video evidence can be extremely effective in legal proceedings. Potential evidence is everywhere and readily available with the proliferation of surveillance cameras and smartphones in everyone’s pockets. With this availability, every legal claim seems to incorporate photos or video. But is photo and video evidence always admissible in court? What are the pitfalls to be aware of when using such evidence?
Admissibility
In order for photo and video evidence to be admissible in court it must meet two basic requirements: relevance and authenticity. In order for evidence to be relevant it must have probative value. In other words, it must either support or undermine the truth of any point at issue in the legal proceedings.
In order for evidence to be authenticated, it must accurately represent its subject as related to the legal claim. For example, a photo or video used as evidence in an accident case must truthfully represent the conditions of the road at the time and date of the accident.
Objection Tactics
While photos and videos may seem like concrete, immutable representations of reality, the fact is that this evidence can be manipulated in order to skew that reality. Lighting, position, perception, filters and editing can be strategically used to misrepresent the facts. Attorneys know this and will use objection tactics to claim that the evidence should be inadmissible. The following are some of the most common objections to photo and video evidence:
-
Undue Prejudice: An attorney can argue that the photo or video evidence is not a reasonable representation of its subject and may result in undue prejudice.
-
Hearsay: If there is no witness present who can be cross-examined, an attorney can argue that the substance of the photo or video evidence is hearsay.
-
The Best Evidence Rule: If the photo or video is secondary evidence (a copy or facsimile), an attorney can argue that the original copy is superior evidence.
-
Lack of Foundation: When visibility, the time of day, the weather or some other factor is at issue in the litigation, an attorney can question a substantial similarity between the occurrence in question and the photo or video evidence.
Photos and videos can serve as valuable evidence in litigation proceedings. In order to ensure that such evidence is admissible in court, it is important to establish a formal policy for the collection and preservation of the evidence, to adhere to the requirements of relevance and authenticity and to prepare for the objection tactics of the opposition.
2 Likes
Hmmm….maybe I should post the numerous quotes from LK that they’ll be used as evidence???
Or maybe the ones about how if they aren’t used as evidence she’ll release them herself.
12 Likes
I think the defense reads the forum threads too. I mean if USEF/SS monitors the threads, very high dollar attorneys can have their staff read all the posts every day and file anything pertinent! Yes, subpoenas would be necessary if they wanted to introduce them in court, right?
2 Likes
What does it matter if the prosecutor doesn’t need them? It’s looking somewhat likely MB will not dispute what happened but claim he was insane.
Time for you all to start studying the M’Naghten rule of insanity…which NJ pretty much uses.
1 Like
Why? You don’t have such a hot record of being right so far.
5 Likes
I’ve been waiting 3 days for you to cite one thing I’ve been wrong about.
Yeah and now this poster knows the defense strategy and probably what the expert witness reports indicate. While Barisone may not be able to remember what happened immediately at the time of the “scuffle”, for sure he recalls the harassment of the previous days and can testify.
5 Likes
Well that’s because you refuse to listen But here’s today’s tidbit. I looked up you David Naughton rule of cray cray and surprise surprise you seem to be wrong.
Again.
Which they claim he was.
7 Likes
Granted it was posted by Sdel, and not KM, there were some quotes directly from LK re the recording devices that seem to clash a bit with what you said about them. It seems there was more than just a camera recording when LK/RG was out of the house. Also more than just a camera acquired prior to the day of the shooting that allegedly wasn’t recording because the residents were home, according to you.
I’ve asked you this question before, and you ignored it, which is your choice, but why install a bunch of cameras on a property that isn’t yours? I get maybe a doorbell camera such as Ring, but cameras/recording devices on other parts of the property such as the stable? Also, if one is so “scared” or fearful, why doesn’t one just leave? I still cannot understand (and probably never will, but fair enough) why the offers to help her (LK) move were not taken. With all the “drama” of the eviction/inspector/whatever, and perceived threat/danger, why stay? If you(g) really thought your life would be in danger, why is it worth sticking around?
Fair enough if you say, “I can’t answer that”
I’m also not trying to “dual” with you, but just asking questions since you claimed to know EVERYTHING. If you can reply without getting nasty, that would be great, if not, don’t bother. 
16 Likes
I have no need to be nasty…you are not one of those who has opinions or questions based solely on hate of LK
.
Things LK may have said about recording devices go back before my involvement. I’m not sure how many audios and/or videos there are but they do exist.
There are many reasons LK did not leave…although she felt she was being threatened. One is that no one imagined the situation was more than an ugly landlord/tenant matter. I don’t think gun violence was on anyone’s radar screen. Another, and you can believe me or not, is that MB owed RG a lot of money for work he did in the house and barn. Sweetgrass, which owns the property, is well aware of that and have acknowledged they owe RG money…in writing.
I’ve said it before but certain people don’t want to hear it…if not for MB’s girlfriend this would not have happened. LK had just brought 2 more horses for MB to train…at MB’s request. LK always paid her bills on time and that’s really what MB cared about.
Obviously, there are things I can’t say…but if you want honest answers I’m more than happy to provide them.
2 Likes
