Dash Cam Questions

[Evolvd]

Having a video of your alleged crime is the same as admitting you committed the crime, which is something protected by the 5th Amendment to the Constitution. The same argument was used for "black boxes" when people crashed their cars or caused accidents. Legally a court cannot use your own video evidence against you unless they subpoena it as evidence. You can't self-incriminate.

Sponsored

 

[ero 5.0]

Thats like saying that your home security footage of you commiting a murder in your own house couldnt be used against u in court. Believe me this is false. Dash cams are seized quite often. An officer can seize it immidiately if he has probable cause that it has footage of a crime being commited. A subsequent subpoena or search warrant is later obtained prior to viewing it.

 

[ero 5.0]

Im not really a tech guy, but if possible ur best bet would be to have ur dash cam record and wirelessly record to a server somewhere instead of on an internal memory card or something that can be seized from the vehicle. Not sure if thats possible, but that would be the safe route.

 

[Evolvd]

Thats like saying that your home security footage of you commiting a murder in your own house couldnt be used against u in court. Believe me this is false. Dash cams are seized quite often. An officer can seize it immidiately if he has probable cause that it has footage of a crime being commited. A subsequent subpoena or search warrant is later obtained prior to viewing it.

Are you a lawyer or do you work in a court of law? That's quite a lot of "facts" you're throwing out there.

 

[T-S550-X]

LOL! An officer does not need a warrant to take someones property as evidence if he is going to charge them with reckless driving. I promise you this....

 

[ero 5.0]

Are you a lawyer or do you work in a court of law? That's quite a lot of "facts" you're throwing out there.

Not taking the bait. just stop spreading FUD and embarrassing yoursef. Unsubscribing...

 

[Evolvd]

Suit yourself, I was asking a serious question.

 

[PonyGrrrl]

I actually asked friend that's an attorney and she confirmed that unless you are arrested and charged with a crime and a warrant is issued by a judge LEOs cannot legally confiscate the SD card from your dash cam or your home security camera footage. Same applies if you witness a crime on camera, a warrant must be obtained. Probable cause or not LEOs cannot confiscate your dash cam SD card without a warrant. In the event that your SD card is obtained without a warrant it will be inadmissible as evidence in a court of law as you have the right to remain silent without an attorney present and it falls under your Miranda rights.

 

[EddieGT]

If your dashcam recorded a crime, whether it was murder or reckless driving, I would not be able to remove the memory card without a warrant. The driver would be detained or arrested and the vehicle secured until a warrant was issued, which can be easily obtained under the circumstances. Once the warrant arrived, most likely a supervisor as well, the memory card would be removed and the chain of custody pertaining to evidence would be followed. The only way to take that memory card from your vehicle, or dvr from your home, would be exigent circumstances. Meaning I would need to be certain that the evidence would be lost or damaged if I did not take it into possession. Hope that clears up any confusion.

 

[dev1360]

I actually asked friend that's an attorney and she confirmed that unless you are arrested and charged with a crime and a warrant is issued by a judge LEOs cannot legally confiscate the SD card from your dash cam or your home security camera footage. Same applies if you witness a crime on camera, a warrant must be obtained. Probable cause or not LEOs cannot confiscate your dash cam SD card without a warrant. In the event that your SD card is obtained without a warrant it will be inadmissible as evidence in a court of law as you have the right to remain silent without an attorney present and it falls under your Miranda rights.

This is SO outrageously wrong it's entertaining. If an LEO has PC to believe that your dash cam has evidence of a crime, it most definitely can be confiscated and entered into evidence. A search warrant must be applied for, and granted, before the footage can be viewed, but it will be taken and secured until that time to prevent the destruction of evidence.

Digital evidence is easily destroyed. So it is taken and secured until viewed.

 

[Evolvd]

Digital evidence does not change the laws of unlawful search and seizure.

But since we are all internet lawyers we can agree to disagree

 

[dev1360]

It's not unlawful search and seizure. It contains evidence of a crime, it IS evidence of a crime. It is taken, and held while a search warrant is applied for to prevent deletion of the evidence.

It's the "Plain View" Doctrine. You're clearly not very well versed in this. It is my job, and I know it well.

Oh, and the conveyance execption also exists when we're speaking of vehicles.

Some reading you might want to consider:

Warren v. Hayden
Carroll v. United States

 

[TheEnglishGuy]

Can the police do "a thing"? Maybe? Maybe not?

However, for you to be "right" you generally need to:

a) Not have the officer chance it, do it anyway and figure he can argue it in court later.
b) Actually have the law on your side.
c) Make sure there's not a loophole you've not overlooked.
d) Spend lots of money on a lawyer to argue your case well.
e) Not have a judge who doesn't give a crap what an entitled member of the public says and sides with the officer anyway.

The officer gets paid, likely overtime, to show up in court. He's quite happy to take a chance and argue it in a courtroom.

You have to pay your lawyer lots of money to look into your case. Then more money to come to court. Then more money when the judge ignores some procedural point and you have to appeal.

So you've spent quite a few grand to be right. Which is probably more than paying the ticket would've been.

And you're not getting that money back in most cases. Unless you can somehow prove malice on the officer's part, your win will consist of "oops, my bad" and you're still saddled with those legal fees.

And, for added shits and giggles, a bunch of asshats have set up companies that collect arrest records and publish them on the web. They rely on society conflating arrest with guilt. If you want them to take that arrest record down so you don't get every google search for your name coming up with your mugshot, you're paying them a couple of hundred. At which point they send the record over to a sister company who posts it and hits you up for another couple of hundred.

So, sure, you may manage to be "right." But being proven right is very, very expensive.

In many cases, you'll end up paying more to have the wrongly seized SD card [assuming there isn't a loophole under which it can be seized] tossed than you would do to just pay the fine in the first place.

 

[dev1360]

Can the police do "a thing"? Maybe? Maybe not?

However, for you to be "right" you generally need to:

a) Not have the officer chance it, do it anyway and figure he can argue it in court later.
b) Actually have the law on your side.
c) Make sure there's not a loophole you've not overlooked.
d) Spend lots of money on a lawyer to argue your case well.
e) Not have a judge who doesn't give a crap what an entitled member of the public says and sides with the officer anyway.

The officer gets paid, likely overtime, to show up in court. He's quite happy to take a chance and argue it in a courtroom.

You have to pay your lawyer lots of money to look into your case. Then more money to come to court. Then more money when the judge ignores some procedural point and you have to appeal.

So you've spent quite a few grand to be right. Which is probably more than paying the ticket would've been.

And you're not getting that money back in most cases. Unless you can somehow prove malice on the officer's part, your win will consist of "oops, my bad" and you're still saddled with those legal fees.

And, for added shits and giggles, a bunch of asshats have set up companies that collect arrest records and publish them on the web. They rely on society conflating arrest with guilt. If you want them to take that arrest record down so you don't get every google search for your name coming up with your mugshot, you're paying them a couple of hundred. At which point they send the record over to a sister company who posts it and hits you up for another couple of hundred.

So, sure, you may manage to be "right." But being proven right is very, very expensive.

In many cases, you'll end up paying more to have the wrongly seized SD card [assuming there isn't a loophole under which it can be seized] tossed than you would do to just pay the fine in the first place.

See above post on seizing items of evidence in a crime. It offers keywords which will allow you to search and become knowledgeable on the subject.

Sponsored