Some places such things aren't accepted. You have the right to face your accuser which is difficult with an automated camera.
At 08:03 PM 2/10/04, you wrote:
>
> I would imagine that for digital, the same scenario would be played out. As
> long as they aren't altered, and the photographer says they represent his
> recollection of the scene photographed, digital would, imho, be admissable.
That's about the strength of it. The picture per se is *not* evidence, but
is generally allowed to be introduced into evidence as a visual depiction of
facts sworn to by a police officer (and who is available for cross-examination).
There are special rules to deal with unaccompanied images such as those taken by automatic speeding cameras.
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan
