- Client Conferences - Medical Expert Conferences - Expert Depositions - Mock Trials and Focus Groups - Trial The use of the technology had already been well-established in US litigation by that time . It has been reported that the first instance of computer-generated graphics being used in a British court took place at Oxford Crown Court in September 1994 : R v Wharton (Horten 1994, p 1289) - Settlement Conferences In use since two decades
By 1992, it was estimated that computer- generated displays had been used in 858 cases in the US where litigation took place between major companies. In these, all except 15 settled out of court and in all the 15 cases which went to trial, the side using computer-generated displays was successful.- ( McKeone 1992, p 6 ). When Used in the Criminal Legal Process Forensic Science Shows a Bias in Favor of the Prosecution. - Science and Justice , Volume 41, Number 4, pp 271 – 277, 2001
The term “ animation ” is usually used to refer to dynamic illustrations, like those that might be used as a teaching aid. The term “ scientific animation ” is reserved for animations in which the motion is governed by scientific principles rather than an artist’s creative vision. They include empirical data from the body or the crime scene. Scientific animations can, accordingly, be thought of as a form of three-dimensional data visualization The third form of animation, “ simulation ” is a scientific animation used specifically for prediction purposes. Animation / Scientific Animation / Simulation 1 2 3
* When the opinions of an expert witness are too difficult to visualize * When an event you are trying to describe simply can't be illustrated by other means * When alternative theories for how certain events happened need to be effectively communicated * When technical issues are simply too complex for the layperson to understand through verbal explanation * When certain events are too dangerous or impossible to recreate * When things like time, motion or speed need to simplified or slowed in order to make sense When Animation for Litigation Works
Evidence is meaningless if it cannot be transmitted effectively to the fact finder.
The Western District of Pennsylvania held that the probative value of a computer animation outweighed any prejudicial effect of the evidence. The Court emphasized that the animation was not offered as a reconstruction of the accident but as an aid to help the jury visualize the testimony proffered by the witnesses. Proper foundation had been provided as to how the computer images were generated, and they accurately reflected the actual vehicles involved.
- Altman v. Bobcat Co., 2008 WL 2779301, at * (W.D. Pa. July 14, 2008).
Any animation must support and corroborate existing evidence.
• The supportive evidence will be used in conjunction with the animation.
• There will be documentary evidence detailing the animation methodology.
• Any distinction between ‘animation’ and ‘simulation ’ will be defined and indicated
Usually, the testimony of the expert that their data was used in the production of the animation, and that the animation accurately illustrates their opinion Of what happened, is sufficient to satisfy the foundational and authenticity requirements for a forensic animation. http://www.expertlaw.com/library/animation/admission_forensic_animation2.html http://www.cliffordlaw.com/news/attorneys-articles/the-use-of-video-at-trial-a-potentially-powerful-tool Admissibility in courts