Replica louis vuittn replica watches affluence items tend to commonly be actual top in replica watches demand. In fact, the amount of humans that crave for rolex replica these items has added absolutely considerably. Today, humans wish to replica watches accept the best of everything, but don consistently accept the money for it. Murakami's Cherry replica watches Blossom arrangement of animated animation faces and blush and breitling replicareplica louis vuittn chicken flowers replica handbags aswell succeeded in bringing boyhood to replica watches uk the table and bringing added action to Louis Vuitton handbags. LV food in Moscow, Russia and in New Delhi, India opened, while the Utah and Suhali collections were aswell rolex replica released. The 20th ceremony of replica watches the LV Cup was aswell commemorated.

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE HAS BECOME A LIABILITY


CASE 1

It is early morning in a United States courtroom where the judge bangs his gavel, bringing the court into session. The assistant district attorney (ADA) gets up to present his case. His star witness is video from an industry standard digital video system. The ADA plays the video clip to reveal pixilated images of a person that may or may not be the defendant being challenged by the arresting officer to perform DWI exercises on the side of the highway. The defendant’s attorney objects to the video being used due to lack of detail in the images, while submitting a motion to dismiss all charges for lack of evidence. The judge agrees, sustains the objection, and dismisses all charges.


CASE 2

Holiday shoppers create a mob scene that force retailers’ doors open for early morning bargains, resulting in a store employee being trampled to death in the human stampede. The video captured by the camera above the door will be challenged to provide enough detail to determine who was responsible for removing the hinges on the doors to the store. The video will not reveal enough facial detail to serve as primary evidence in the case. Investigators resort to interviewing individuals’ for hours on end, comparing opinions and attempting to thread together the facts. The video captured will be a validating piece of evidence vs. leading and immediate.


CASE 3

A circuit court judge located in the Midwestern United States recently served on an expert panel, in front of a body of professional investigators and first responders. He comments that the court system is “not keeping pace with the changes or the understanding of technology for video surveillance”. His current position is that video surveillance is becoming a liability with its present state of capability:


WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN TO THE SURVEILLANCE INDUSTRY?
Private Citizens are now challenging organizations like retailers and building management organizations in court, for failing to properly maintain security and/or surveillance systems. The consequence of this is the inability to capture proper detail, leading to arrest and conviction. In other words, if an organization has cameras installed and evident, they have provided “intent” to protect. The public then has an expectation of protection. If this intent exists, there is liability associated with it. The citizens that are taking this position are winning in court.

 

Pulled from the white paper from Frost & Sullivan entitled "USING VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AS EVIDENCE CAPTURING AND STORING THE BEST VIDEO FOR EVIDENCE"

If you would like to read the complete White paper click here!