"Here, Officer Berg did not qualify as the appropriate witness and did not have the necessary knowledge of the underlying workings, maintenance, or recordkeeping of the Redflex Traffic System. The foundation for the introduction of photographical evidence and the underlying workings of the Redflex Traffic System was outside the personal knowledge of Officer Berg.
In absence of a proper foundation, the photographic evidence was held inadmissable."
The officer cannot be the accuser and introduce the evidence if he has no expertise in how the evidence was obtained.
>Heard’s attorneys said they have discovered new information that the person who showed up for jury duty was born in 1970. But the person who was actually summoned for jury duty was born in 1945 and would have been 77 at the time of the trial. Both the person who served and the person summoned live at the same address and share the same name, according to the supplemental memorandum.
The police in Georgetown about half an hour north of Austin went with his gut in one murder case - "it has to be someone the victim knew" and ignored physical evidence at the scene and the eyewitness testimony of the murder victim's son. Then the prosecutor kept working against the accused for the next 25 years and suppressed evidence.
https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-innocent-man-part-...
Never mind a hunch - even a murder trial alleging that a nurse is killing patients may be based on nothing but bias, coincidence, and a poor knowledge of statistics.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes/eyewitness-misidentif...
reply