Is the use of computer-generated graphics a positive step in the interest of justice? Why or why not?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Computer-generated evidence has been admitted into criminal courts as substantive and demonstrative evidence. The use of computer-generated forensic recreations and simulations may prove to be extremely persuasive to jurors and jurists alike. In the United States, the use of visual aids and technologically assisted learning have become almost universally expected because of the growing importance of computers in education, commerce, and communication. Thus, the use of such has become commonplace in American courtrooms. Computer graphics and animation must: (1) depict a relevant fact, (2) be introduced by a witness, (3) be authenticated as an accurate representation of the fact at issue, and (4) not be considered hearsay unless such falls within the parameters of an exception to the hearsay rule. Computer simulations, on the other hand, must meet additional requirements because their purpose is to draw conclusions. Driven by scientific formulas, simulations suggest possibilities based on the information provided. As such, computer simulations that are designed to be substantive must be based on accepted scientific standards and must satisfy Daubert or Frye requirements. Opinions will vary.