Destroyed Surveillance Footage, Court Approves

Author: IPVM Team, Published on Jan 02, 2014

All is not always lost if surveillance footage from a crime is unavailable for the trial. If enough people have seen the video before it goes missing then their testimony is admissible in lieu of having the actual tape in court ... at least that is what an appellate judge affirmed this week in Washington State. In this note, we examine the case and whether or not it should have been thrown out.

Background

Two men were charge and convicted of a 2009 burglary of a Toys R Us store. The state’s case against the two men centered around at surveillance video that purported to show the men committing the crime.

An employee was suspicious of one man when he came into the store on Nov 1, 2009 and told two other employees to keep an eye on him. The two were known for retail theft schemes. He watched him pace around in the electronics section then meet up with the other man who was pushing a cart with a box in it toward the exit. A second employee called for them to stop as they walked past the registers, but they continued past the cashiers and outside to a waiting Jaguar. The employee says he called 911 as they loaded the box into the trunk. The box was so heavy it took two of them to lift, and he saw the car’s suspension shift. The store says the box contained $5,800 worth of Nintendo DS systems.

The responding officer saw the car on his way to the store and pulled them over and detained them seven minutes after the initial 911 call. Another officer brought an employee to the scene to identify them, which he did. The Jaguar was impounded, and police got a warrant to search it. They found the box that was in the surveillance video, but it was empty.

What The Footage May Have Showed

Back at the store, the employee who first noticed the men was reviewing surveillance footage. He says several cameras showed that one man open a locked storeroom door, fill up and empty box with Nintendo video game systems, and set the box outside the door. Ballou came back with a cart, and they loaded the box and pushed it to the exit.

The Tape Disappears

When they Lynwood Police Department asked for a copy of the tape, a Toys R Us employee tried to make a copy, but “the machine did not work properly” and “the disk drive on the video recorder was stuck closed, so he could not burn a copy to disk.” A police officer reviewed the video. A week later an integrator came to look at the recorder and said the whole thing needed to be replaced, so they replaced the system, disposing of the video.

The store employee never offered for police to take the whole recorder and police never asked for it or got a court order to take it, the appeal says. There was no additional evidence like fingerprints or pry marks on the door.

After learning the video had ultimately been destroyed when the system was replaced, one filed a motion to dismiss the trial suggesting he was being denied due process. The motion was not granted. A judge said: “The fact that the video is not available the Court determines is a matter of weight, not admissibility, and the court will allow it.”

The Trial

The trial relied on recaps of the video from the responding officer and three employees who watched the video. One employee said he watched the video more than 30 times.

The defendants argued that a jury should have been able to watch the video to make a decision for themselves what it showed. For all anyone knows, they could have just stolen an empty box, which was going to get thrown in the trash anyway, the defense said. They also argued that the only thing he is guilty of based on actual evidence is accessing a locked storeroom.

A jury convicted him anyway, and he was sentenced to 51 months in prison. He appealed the case.

The Appeal

In December 2012, one man filed an appeal arguing that there was not enough evidence to convict him of anything other than unlawfully entering the store’s stockroom. The appeal further says the court was wrong to let witnesses testify they had seen him in the store security video.

“The trial court erred in failing to exclude the witnesses’ testimony about what they say on a videotape that had been destroyed well before trial and have never been available for the defendant or his counsel to review,” the appeal reads. It says there is no evidence he entered the room with the intent to commit a crime.

It also argues this violated the defendants’ right to due process saying “Fundamental fairness requires that the government preserve and disclose to the defense favorable evidence that is material to guilt or punishment ... In this case, the State allowed the loss or destruction of the only evidence that Pegs had committed a burglary.”

The appeal was denied. An appellate judge ruled that the 14th Amendment was not violated because the state was not responsible for the destruction of the video and the destruction was no “improperly motivated.”

The appellate judge further said that because the tape was destroyed, and it wasn’t the state’s fault, that the testimony, describing the contents of the tape, was admissible.

Additionally, “Those two men were the only African American customers in the store at that time and were wearing the same clothes that [employees saw them] wearing while they were in the store, when leaving the store, and at the show-up,” the ruling says.

Should this Case Have Been Thrown Out?

This case relied obviously relied heavily on evidence that was not there: surveillance video. There was no physical evidence and the Nintendos were never recovered. Should this case have been thrown out?

Comments (20)

***, *** ***** ******** *** ******* ********** ********, ******* **** weight *** ***** ********** ** *****.

*******

*** **** ** *** *** ********** ** "**********." ********** ******** usually ******* ** ********* **** * ****** ********* **********. **** a ****** *** ******* * ***** ** * ***** ** YouTube ****** * ******* **** *****-********** *********?

**** ***** ********* **** * ***** *** *** ******** ********* ****** * ***** ***** *** ********* ***** *** ** produced?

*** ***** ***** **** ********* ***** ** **********.

* ***** **** ********* ***** ** **** ************ ******* *** guard *** ******** ******** ********* ** ** ******** ** *********** an **********. *** ***** ***'* **** ******** ******* ***** *** fact.

***, * **** ** *** * ****** ** * ******* vehicle *** ** *********** *******.

*** ****** *************: *** ******** ***** "****** ** ******".

****, *** **** **** *****?

** **, * ***** *** ****** ** ***** **** ***** and ********** ** **** *********. ** *** ********** ** *** *** ***** ****.

*** ********* ***** ****** *** ********** **** ***** ** ******** and **** *********. ***** ** ******* **** **** ** *** don't **** ** ******** **** **** *** **** ****** ******* as ** **'* *********, *********** ** ******* ******** ******** ** it. ****, **'* *** ************* ****** ** ****** * ********** after ******** ******* ****** * ******** ********* *** ** **** case ******** ********* ****** *** ***** *** *** ******* ** what **** ******** ** **** ***** *** *** ************* ******* of **** *** ******** **** ******* **** ************, *** *******, the ***, ***.

** **** ***** *** *** ********** ** ******** *** ******** staffs. *** *********** ******* ***** **** **** **** *** ** was ********* **** *** *** **** *** ******** ** ** might **** *** ******* ********* ** **. ******....******...******.

****, ***** *** **** **** ****** **** *** ** *** preserved ****** **** **** *** ******** ****, ** *** ***********?

**** * ** ********* * ********* ****, * ************ **** the ****** **** *** **** **** ** **** *** ** back ** ********* **** *********** *** ***** ** ****. **** being ****, * ** **** *** ********* *** * *** weeks ****** ********** *** **** ***** **** ** ****, *** I ***** ** ****** ** *** ******* *** ** **** sure **** **** **** **** ****.

** *** ***** * ** ** *** *****?

**** **** *****,"*** ******* *** *** **** ********” *** “*** **** ***** on *** ***** ******** *** ***** ******".****** **** * **** ** **** ** **. ** "**** drive", ** ***** ** **** *** ********** **** *** ********* to * ** ********* *****. ******* * **** *** **** in *** ******** ** **** ** **** ** *** ****, but **** *** ****** ********* **** * ** ******** *** capable ** ***** *********, ** **** **** *** ***** ** back ** ** * ***** *****. ** **** *******, *** footage ***** **** **** ****** *** ** **** ****** ****** it, *** ****** **** ** *** **** **** ** ******** off ** **.

**** * ***'* ********** ** **** ** **** ** *** case, *** *** ****** **** ********* *** ********** ** ************ video ******? *.*., *** ***** *** *******, *** ***** *** missing ******** *******, ***.

** **** *************, *******'* **** **** ***** ***** *** **** **** ** destroyed ** ** *** *** ********* ****?

****, ***'** ***** ** **** **** ** * ******* *** consider *** * ****** * "***** ***********" ** * ******* moments ****** ******** **** "* *** ** ******* ***** **** clerk, *** * **** ** *** **** * ****'* **** him". *** ***'* *********** ******* ********* ** *** ********* ***** that ***** *********** *** ********* ** ***** *** *** *** died ***** ****** *** *********. **'* *** ***** ****** ********* from *** ******* ***** **** ** ******* ** ***, *** the ***** **** **** ****** **** ***** ****** *** **** inclined ** *** *** *** *********'* ********* ** **********.

**** ****** ******** *** ************ ***** ** *** ** ***** but ****'* **** ** *********** *** * ***** *****. ********** of *** **'** ***** ***** *.*., ****** *** **** ********** in **** ********, ********* **** ******* ********* ** * ****** act ** **** ** ********* ****** ********. *** *****(*) **** has *** **** ** **** ** ***. ****'* *** ** be *** **** ****!

****, ******. ** **** ******* ** *** **** ******** ** weight *** **** **** ******* ***** ** ********. ** ***'* say ** ************** ********** ********* ***** ************, ** ***** ********** **** ** would***** **** ****** **** ************ **** ***** ** ********, ****** and ********** ** *****. ** **, **'* *** **** ** a ******** ********** ** ****** * ******* ******* ** *****.

***** *************** ** ********* ** *** ******* **** *** ***** *** strict ************ *** **** **** ********* *** ** ****.

***** ********** ***** ** ********, * ***** *********** ** ********** ** *** ********* ** the ********* *** *********:

  1. ************** ** *** *********
  2. *** *********’* ********* ** ***** ******* ** * ******** *********** for ********, ** ** * ***** ******;
  3. *** *********’* ********* *** **** ***** ***** *** ****** **** his ***** *** ********; ***
  4. The *********’* ********* **** ****** ** *** ***** ** ************* ** **** ** ******** ** **

**** '** ******* **** *** *****' ******** ** *** ** instance ***** * ***** *********** *** ** **** - ****** it *** *** ***** ****** *** *********** ********** *** - *** *** ******* *** ********* *** ********.

*** ******* **** ** *** ***** *********** **** ***** **:

"***********, *** ********* **** ****** ** *** ************* ** ***cause ** *** *********'* *** *****. A counterexample is the dying declaration of Clifton Chambers in 1988, in which Chambers confessed that ten years earlier, he had helped his son bury a man named Russell Bean, whom the son had killed by accident. The statement was sufficient cause to justify a ********** * ****** ** *** ***'* ********; ****'* **** *** indeed *****, *** ***** *** ** ******** ******** ** * crime ***** *** *****, *** ***** ******** *** *** *** victim, *** ***** *********** *** *** ********** ** ********, *** the *** *** ***** ******* ** *****."

-----------------

I'm *** * ********* * ********** ** * ******* *** ******* **** *****, *** * tend ** ***** **** ***********#*******'* **** ***** **** ** **** thread (**** *** ******):

******* *** ***** ******** **** *** ***** *********, ******** **** people *** ****** *** **********(******* ** *** ***** ** ** ****** **** ** *** office) ****** ** *** ********* ****** ** ******* ** ********** testimony - **** *** *********** ********* *** ********** ********. (*.*. "I *** **** ****** - **** ** ********.")

*******, * ***** **** ********* **** ****** ************** *** ********* ***** ****** ********** ** ********************. (*.*. "* *** * ***** ******* **** ****** ***** the ****, *** *** ***** ** ****** ******.")

*****, ** ** *** **** *** **** ********* **** ******** who **** ********* ******* **** **********, ***** *** ** ******* ** *** actual **** ***** *** ** *****?

*******, * ***** **** ********* **** ****** ************** *** ********* ***** ****** ********** ** ********************. (*.*. "* *** * ***** ******* **** ****** ***** the ****, *** *** ***** ** ****** ******.")

***** ** ******* **** * ******** ** ** *** ******* of **** ****, *** ** ****'*. ****'* *********** ** **** in ********, ** ** **** **** *** ******* ******** **** cases ** **** **** *** *******, **** ***'* **** * case, ********** ** *** **** ****** *** **, **** * narcotics ******* ****. ** **** ** ** **'* *** ***** to *** * **** ** ******* **** *****'* ***** *******.

****, * ** ******** **** ******* **** ** ***** ***** for *** ****** ** **** ****** **** **** ******* **** penned * ******* **** **** **/*** ****, **** '****'?

** ********* **** **** **** *******, ******* *** ****** **** glee************* ***** ** ** *** **** ** ***** ********* ******* who ******** ** **** **** * ******* **** **** *******************, *** *** **** '******* ****' *****'* *****.

I'm *** * ******, *** **** ******** ******* ** ** ** ** ********-** hearsay - ** ** * ******* *********: '**** *** **** me '*'".

***,

* **** **** ***** **** ** ** *** **** *** years ** *** ********* *****. *** ************* *** ***** **** *** ***** **** ** *** **/*** drive ** ******. *** *** **** *****. ** **************** **** ** -** **** ******'**** * ******* *******. ******* *** **** * ** ***** did *** **** **** **** **** *****. ** ***** *** unit ** ** ******* **** *** **** ******* ** *** evidence ** **.

** ** *** ********** *** ****** ***'* ************** ** ** to ****** *** ********? ** ****** **** **** ** ******** a **** ** ***** *** **** *** * *** **** or ***** **** ******** **. **** ** ** ***********, ***** unit **** ** ******** ** **** ***** **** ***** ** have ************ *** *** **********, ** ****** *** **** ****** to **. ** **** ******** *** **** ****** *** ** days ** *** ***** ***** *** ** ******** ***** *********** on *** ***** ****** ** ***** *** *****. ** ** not ***** **** ** ** *** **********. ** ** *** his ******** ** ** ****.

** ** *** ********** *** ****** ***'* ************** ** ** to ****** *** ********? ** ****** **** **** ** ******** a **** ** ***** *** **** *** * *** **** or ***** **** ******** **. **** ** ** ***********, ***** unit **** ** ******** ** **** ***** **** ***** ** have ************ *** *** **********, ** ****** *** **** ****** to **. ** **** ******** *** **** ****** *** ** days ** *** ***** ***** *** ** ******** ***** *********** on *** ***** ****** ** ***** *** *****. ** ** not ***** **** ** ** *** **********. ** ** *** his ******** ** ** ****.

***** *** *** * ***** **********, ******* ** **** ***** * **** ** ** **********, the *** ***** ******* **** * **** ** **** ** do **** *** **** ***** ** * **** ** **** to ****. * ******* ** ******* * ****** *** *****, but ***** ** *** ****** ******? ****** ** ** ** job ** ** ********** ** ****** **** *** ***** ***** it **** ***** ***** *********, ** ****** ** ** *** end ***** ************** ** ****** **** *** *** ***** **** after ******** *********. ** ****, *** ***** *** ** ***** with ** ******, *** * ***** *'* ******* ** **** from ***** ***********/*** ***** ** **** ***** ******** *** ** this *******.

** **** ********** ****, ** * *** *** ********** *** I **** ***** *** ******** ******* **** **** ******, * would **** **** **** ****** ** ** **** ** ****** they *** ** (******** ******* *** ******** ***** **** **** the ******* ********). *** ** * ****** ******, ******* *** integrator, *** ******, *** *** *** **** ** **** ********** case, ** ***************** **** * ****.

** **** ******** ******* * *** **** ****** ** **** discussion **** *** ******** ***** ***** ********* ******** *** *** custody/retention ** *********' **'* ***** * *** ** *** ******* is ** ********* **********. ** ** ********** ********* * ******'* equipment, *** ** ****** ** **** ******** *** *** ***** on ** ******. **** **** ******* ** *** ****** **** ** ***** prudent ** **** * **** ** ***** ** ************ ****** the ****/** ** *** *****. ** ***** **** ****** ********* entanglements, *****'* **?

*********** ****... ** *** ** ** **** * ******** **** called '****** ** *******'. ** ******** ** ********* ****** ** is ******* **** * ******** ** ***** ** ** **** actions **** ***** ** ***** ** ****** **. ** ** could **** **** *******, *** ** ****'*, **** * ****** of ******* *** ** ********. ** * ***** ***** **** all *********** ******* *** **** ***** *** *** *********** *** down ** ** ********** ***** **** *** **** *** ** allowed ** ********.

**** ****:

****://**.************.***/*****/*************/*********

* **** ******* ***** **....

******* ****** ***** *** ******* *** *****. **** **** **** contemparaneous ***** ** *** **** *** ******** **** *** ***** shows. *** ** *** ***** ***** *** ******* *** ** export *** *****, *** ******* ********* **** *** ***** ****** it *** * * *** *********. * ******* ** **** for ******** ***** ********. ** ****** ****** ***** *** *** footage *** ******* ***********. ** *** *** * ****, ** was *****! ****** ** *******? **

**** ***** ****** ****** ** ** *** * ****, *** we ******** *** ******* ** *** *, *** *** *** attend ***** *** *, ***** ** *** ***********. ****** ** process......Maybe! ***** *** * ***** ** ******!

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports

Chinese Police Wearing Facial Recognition Are Here on Feb 06, 2018
This is a very interesting and highly atypical usage of facial recognition that the Chinese government touted this week: It is a PRC police...
The Interceptor Aims To Fix Vulnerability In Millions of Alarm Systems on Jan 08, 2018
Security executive Jeffery Zwirn claims a 'catastrophic' flaw exists in 'millions of alarm systems', and dealers could be liable if not fixed. The...
Chinese Government Attacks Western Reports on Jan 03, 2018
The Chinese government is angry at the BBC and WSJ's reporting on Chinese video surveillance (see BBC Features Dahua and WSJ Investigates China's...
Washington DC Surveillance Hackers Arrested on Dec 29, 2017
The US Department of Justice has announced that "Two Romanian Suspects Charged With Hacking of Metropolitan Police Department Surveillance Cameras...
WSJ Investigates China's Total Surveillance State on Dec 26, 2017
The WSJ is continuing its investigation into Chinese video surveillance. Following up on last month's WSJ Investigation of Hikvision, the WSJ is...
Failed Retail Video Analytics Startup Analyzed on Dec 19, 2017
Most manufacturers in this industry try hard to cover up failure. But an industry startup backed by Silicon Valley's most prestigious accelerator...
This Manufacturer Shuns IP Cameras on Dec 14, 2017
One manufacturer has chosen a bold strategy in avoiding getting caught up in the race to the bottom: shun IP solutions. We spoke with an executive...
BBC Features Dahua on Dec 13, 2017
Hikvision is not the only mega-Chinese video surveillance manufacturer getting global attention. Last month, the WSJ investigated Hikvision and now...
Panasonic Unified Surveillance Strategy Analyzed on Nov 17, 2017
Panasonic is now a "Unified Surveillance" offering, as their ASIS 2017 booth proclaimed: Looking to make a comeback in the security industry,...
WSJ Investigates Hikvision on Nov 13, 2017
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has released a detailed investigation into Hikvision's government ownership and cybersecurity problems, hitting the...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Why 3VR Failed on Feb 16, 2018
3VR destroyed transformed ~$65 million in VC funding into a $6.9 million exit. The reason they failed is simple. They bet on analytics. They...
"Fear Mongering": Hikvision USA Cybersecurity Director Dismisses Chinese Government Ownership Concerns on Feb 16, 2018
The facts are: The Chinese government created Hikvision and is Hikvision's controlling shareholder. Hikvision's Chairman, a Communist Party...
16:9 vs 4:3 Video Aspect Ratio Statistics on Feb 16, 2018
What aspect ratio do security integrators prefer? The 'standard' 4:3 or the 'wide' 16:9 one? 100+ integrators told us what they preferred, with...
Mercury Releases New Series 3 Redboard Access Panels on Feb 15, 2018
Mercury Security has their first major product release post-HID buyout, and things literally look different. The Series 3 SIO boards now are red...
Last Chance February 2018 Camera Course on Feb 15, 2018
This is the last chance to get into the Winter camera course, starts next Tuesday. Register now. IPVM provides the best education, live online...
Hikvision DeepInMind Tested Terribly on Feb 15, 2018
While Hikvision is heavily marketing deep learning and 'AI' as their next big thing, new IPVM test results of their DeepInMind NVR shows their deep...
Genetec CEO: You Cannot Buy Trust on Feb 14, 2018
Genetec's CEO, Pierre Racz, delivered a direct message at their channel partner conference: Racz has become a focal point in the industry debate...
Assa's Lowest Power Draw Maglock: Securitron M680E Examined on Feb 14, 2018
Securitron produces some of the most extreme maglocks on the market, including massively strong maglocks and even ones with integrated CCTV cams...
Hanwha Wisenet X 5MP Camera Tested (XNV-8080R) on Feb 13, 2018
Wisenet X is Hanwha's high-end camera line. We tested their Wisenet X 1080p camera last year. Now Hanwha is offering 5MP cameras listing super low...
Top Problems For Integrator Project Management on Feb 13, 2018
Security projects routinely encounter issues that jeopardize deadlines, create confusion, and shrink profits. Unfortunately, there are common...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact