The Use of Visual Surveillance Evidence
Over the years, we have found that the following rules comprise effective strategies when using electronically produced visual evidence, both as a claim-negotiating tool as well as in the courtroom:
Rule 1 Our original visual media contents are never tampered with, edited or altered.
To meet legal requirement, the original production must remain intact to sustain its
probative value. However, some lawyers request an edited or reduced version of the
digitally produced visual evidence showing the physical activity highlights.
This is acceptable, as the court can then be offered both the original and specifically
edited exhibits as evidence.
(We preserve all original visual evidential productions under secure conditions,
providing clients with a true copy. The original is produced in the event of trial.)
Rule 2 The showing of visual evidence to and for the benefit of treating physicians;
highlighting the physical conditioning of a claimant, has often resulted in a reversal
of a diagnosis.
Rule 3 Visual evidence that demonstrates – to a standard beyond a preponderance of the evidence – that the level of physical activity memorialized is inconsistent with the
allegations of disability, brings to the fore issues of claimant credibility.
Rule 4 Maryland law does not dictate disclosure of the existence of visual evidence in
the early stages of negotiations and generally at or in anticipation of deposition
proceedings.
Rule 5 In those jurisdictions where thorough pretrial discovery is an accepted protocol, our client’s attorneys elect to list the investigator as a witness and, at that time, reveal the existence of a surveillance videotape.
Rule 6 Our investigators, when called to testify in a surveillance case, remain objective and impartial. They are there to provide evidence of what they saw – direct and pertinent evidence. They are there to convey the truth – nothing more, nothing less.
Rule 7 We have noted through the years that, the vast majority of cases in which there is established irrefutable visual evidence depicting strenuous physical activity capability in a claimant, there is a tendency to move to settlement prior to trial.
The most significant value to be associated with such visual evidence is that it
induces the claimant, and their representatives, to adopt a more settlement-oriented
frame of mind.
Rule 8 We have found, in deference to the technology we utilize, the provision of selected Still-photographic exhibits, extracted and produced from the actual recorded visual surveillance compilation, has been equally beneficial in negotiating proceedings, and it can serve to delay the disclosure of the existence of such a visual production.