Big question about dash cams and the legality of using them in court. Has anyone actually used the recorded video proof in an accident investigation???? It seems some people are saying dash cams are illegal in some states or their use in an investigation or litigation is not allowed as evidence!!! Is this true??? It seems logical since many times during a law suit incriminating evidence is not allowed. What are some opinions on this from those who have experienced an accident.

The South Carolina State Trooper had no problem charging the other driver once I pulled my trump card of a dash cam video. Little hard to refute. I would caution that you keep date and time up to date on the camera. Some lose that when powered down for too long.

x2 you know what the old saying is,, a pic is worth a thousand words.

I have heard that in some cases, the police ask folks for any pics/video of accidents or crimes. That being said, the company I drive for has them and yes it has shown when either we or others are at fault. In 1 case (and this get's my goat), the dash cam clearly shows a accident wasn't our fault.......yet we got sued. Do believe this particular case was settled or in other words we paid the other party off just to be done with it. So in this case, why have the cams? IMO, I truly feel the cams (which record both forward and towards the driver) is just to see what our driver was doing at time of accident should we be involved and doing anything against company policy.

Had someone hit my truck while they were being directed into their spot this summer. After sending the video from my dash cam on the motorhome (truck was parked in front) there was no question who was at fault. The other insurance accepted the video and paid within a week.So having a video might keep you from having to go through the courts.

Dash cam video of an ambulance hitting my mirror on a bridge was enough for them to pay the $860 repair. Trooper advised not to let it write over it.

Is dash cam evidence allowed in an investigation

Lwiddis
Explorer II
Dec 25, 2019
“If serious enough (going to court) I would insist on the LEO taking possession of the camera (with a receipt) so the chain of evidence is maintained.“

Not Constitutionally permissible...cuzz you think it “serious enough”...without a warrant. And I don’t find “with a receipt” anywhere in the Constitution. Not a “chain” issue at all. Do some reading.
Lwiddis
Explorer II
Dec 25, 2019
“Do believe this particular case was settled or in other words we paid the other party off just to be done with it.”

What clearer admission of fault is there? You...your company...PAID the other driver.
gbopp
Explorer
Dec 25, 2019
I don't know why it would be illegal or improper to use a dash cam video in court.
It would be better than an eye witness. The video will tell the same story every time and will not change its testimony.
JMO
fj12ryder
Explorer III
Dec 25, 2019
As long as there is no way to edit video footage in any way, I would say dash cam evidence would be admitted. There isn't is there? :)
spoon059
Explorer II
Dec 25, 2019
Generally speaking, yes camera evidence is allowable in court. However, the other side may argue to throw out that evidence because its authenticity cannot be verified. Its up to you (or the state) to put forward evidence that the video was recorded on the date and time in question and was not altered. A slick attorney might be able to throw enough spaghetti against the wall to get some to stick and get the video tossed, but generally it should be allowed.
mich800
Explorer
Dec 25, 2019
spoon059 wrote:
Generally speaking, yes camera evidence is allowable in court. However, the other side may argue to throw out that evidence because its authenticity cannot be verified. Its up to you (or the state) to put forward evidence that the video was recorded on the date and time in question and was not altered. A slick attorney might be able to throw enough spaghetti against the wall to get some to stick and get the video tossed, but generally it should be allowed.

There is also a big difference between a civil or criminal proceeding. The ability of a criminal prosecutor to introduce evidence is much different than a defense to show reasonable doubt.
westernrvparkow
Explorer
Dec 25, 2019
While it might be allowed, in many instances it won't be used. If it is a minor accident with minimal damage (from the insurer's or police point of view) there isn't going to be an investigation by either the police or the insurance company. Also a video will only show a partial picture of what actually happened. For example, a video might very well show the impact of a collision but not show who had a red light and who had green.
midnightsadie
Explorer II
Dec 25, 2019
judge judy likes movies.
JRscooby
Explorer II
Dec 25, 2019
Back before all the phones had cameras I kept a disposable camera in each of my trucks. Told the drivers to take pictures if thought might be a problem. A contractor wanted me to back a load in a driveway, but when I started taking pictures of the cracks he changed his mind.
CFerguson
Explorer
Dec 25, 2019
Yes it is admissible. Period. If there are issues of alteration or whatnot, they will be fought out in open court. Specific circumstances will then apply.

I run 2 cams, 1 forward and 1 backward pointing.