这个有没道理？ -alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra) @拉斯维加斯华人论坛:拉斯维加斯枫下论坛 The Rolia Forum of Las Vegas

这个有没道理？

alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra)

The admissibility of such evidence is based on relevance to a material fact of a case。。Dash cam evidence is relevant if it makes the existence or non-existence of any fact。。。more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. To decide whether the dash cam evidence is relevant, ask yourself whether the evidence helps you prove or disprove the facts involved in your claim.

http://claimscanada.ca/dash-cam-evidence/

(#10664728@0)
Last Updated: 2017-3-11
This post has been archived. It cannot be replied.

私人的行车记录仪的录像是不能作为上庭的证据的 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-10 (#10663537@0)

那买行车记录仪还有什么用？上次brampton的司机(wrongfully charged)就把记录的视频登到CBC news -yudeshui(鱼得水); 2017-3-10 (#10663564@0)

不可指控别人。但可以为你自己辩护。 -3854688(小鹏); 2017-3-10 (#10663573@0)

前天俺就录到非闪灯的警察车在红灯处U turn -yudeshui(鱼得水); 2017-3-10 (#10663616@0)

警察执法不一定要闪灯，闪灯是为了清除路上的车。 -hunhunhunhun(不知道); 2017-3-10 (#10663812@0)
你对交规不了解，你也可以这么U turn，而且在警察眼皮下。 -blanc(so what); 2017-3-10 (#10663998@0)

你当自己是便衣呢？ -mayer(农场生活); 2017-3-10 (#10664308@0)

全世界的规定都是在没有禁止掉头的路口可以掉头而且不受信号限制但是必须观察路面车辆，一旦出问题调头车全责。 -blanc(so what); 2017-3-10 (#10664370@0)

In Calgary it is absolutely illegal to make a u turn at ANY intersection. -honeylager(No Name); 2017-3-11 (#10666064@0)
有没有link 学习下，就加拿大的就看? -augo(lig); 2017-3-14 (#10670480@0)

除了上法庭做證據外的其他用途 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-10 (#10663769@0)

俺买目的就是为traffic ticket用途，不然买干吗 -yudeshui(鱼得水); 2017-3-10 (#10663898@0)

心理作用而已 -guanshui88(约定); 2017-3-10 (#10663990@0)
你觉得这里警察会随便诬告你吗？ -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-10 (#10664034@0)

不是你想像那么简单，上次brampton就有人被wrongfully charged -yudeshui(鱼得水); 2017-3-10 (#10664040@0)

这是个别例子，一般人接告票的概率很低，错误检控的概率更低更低, 大约是零 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664526@0)

会的，有一次跟着拥挤的车流走，他偏说我们开60km/h, 怎么可能？大家都是50 左右 -ltndsy(Joanna); 2017-3-11 (#10664768@0)

打告票是攻击控方证人的证据，不是自提证据，辩方的证据是没用的 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664534@0)

你可以让警察看录像，他有酌情权，可考虑不提起诉，但一旦上庭，法庭一般不会接受你的录像做证据的 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664527@0)

录像可以给保险公司看，如果对方撒谎，你的录像对你有帮助 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664529@0)

法庭只会接受证人的证据，一般不会接受辩方证据的，更何况是录像？ -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664535@0)

这么说太绝对了吧，拿出证据，只要是可以确认的，反驳控方，有何不可采信的？ -alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra); 2017-3-11 (#10664669@0)

你先去了解一下法庭的流程再说 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664718@0)

这个有没道理？ -alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra); 2017-3-11 {397} (#10664728@0)
The admissibility of such evidence is based on relevance to a material fact of a case。。Dash cam evidence is relevant if it makes the existence or non-existence of any fact。。。more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. To decide whether the dash cam evidence is relevant, ask yourself whether the evidence helps you prove or disprove the facts involved in your claim.
http://claimscanada.ca/dash-cam-evidence/

我觉得 court 最多会 receive，但是不会 admit。不知道 court 有没有机会去 play。你要实现联系 court clerk，问问他们怎么播放，允许播放否。如果是我，我会选 scene，然后打印出来，当场呈递。 -troyd(•); 2017-3-11 (#10664674@0)

无论是录像还是照片，采用与否，你能影响 judge，目的就达到了。 -troyd(•); 2017-3-11 (#10664675@0)
你连播放的机会都没有，你只要提出来，控方必定会反对播放 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664702@0)

提前把 video 作为 exhibit 送进去，由 judge/court 来决定吧。recorded depositions 多了去了。 -troyd(•); 2017-3-11 (#10664730@0)

;traffic ticket有3选项--认罪；trial;还有和检控官谈判妥协，这样可以播放视频 -yudeshui(鱼得水); 2017-3-11 (#10665572@0)

是的，和检控官谈判，可以播放视频，检控官可决定是否撤诉 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10665956@0)

deposition is part of discovery process, not part of the trial process, don't get confused -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10665961@0)

录像有太多不可以确认性，你没有办法证明它是100% 原来的，真实的。你看看电影的特技，那是真实的吗？单就它经过压缩这一项就令它法庭不能接受了。 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664711@0)

Dash Cam Evidence - Onboard cameras can minimize fraud, encourage early settlements and save insurance companies costs -- 简言之，车带录像在有争议时可作法庭证据，保险公司也会采信 -alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra); 2017-3-11 (#10664725@0)

It said "Police 。。MAY be utilized as evidence"，你是警察吗？ -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664731@0)

请耐心读完：The admissibility of such evidence is based on relevance to a material fact of a case。 -alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra); 2017-3-11 {310} (#10664737@0)
。Dash cam evidence is relevant if it makes the existence or non-existence of any fact。。。more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. To decide whether the dash cam evidence is relevant, ask yourself whether the evidence helps you prove or disprove the facts involved in your claim.

我暈， you forgot to quote "In the civil context" -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 {203} (#10664763@0)
Civil context requires prove that is greater than 50% against the other side. But in traffic case, prove has to be beyond reasonable doubt. It is a very reasonable doubt that video can be altered easily.

How courts and law enforcement will use this remains to be further determined. -- 确实啊，执法如何采信，还是很模糊，只能自己有备而来了。 -alaabracadabra(AlaAbracadabra); 2017-3-11 (#10664772@0)

Please stick to the original question: "Using dash cam video as defense evidence" -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664740@0)

我不是说录像一定不能作证据，只是录像的真实性太容易在法庭上被对方挑战了，不是我们想象的带个视频在法庭让法官看看就是了，所以是很难接受作证据的。 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664856@0)

我糊涂了。录像容易造假，证词就更容易造假，说谎的还少吗 -yudeshui(鱼得水); 2017-3-11 (#10665567@0)

要看是谁的证词，辦方的证词由于有利益冲突，是不可信的。警察的证词，除非有疑点，否則可信 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10665932@0)

看看一个大律师怎么说 -canadagoose(楓中秋雁); 2017-3-11 (#10664859@0)

@Las Vegas

这个有没道理？

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics