Video Taped Statements

I watched a portion of a trial today while I was waiting for my case to be called in the Birch Building. I have a case next week withe the same prosecutor and just wanted to watch. One evidence issue came to mind during the trial which sparked a thought. Normally , when a video tape is introduced at trial, the district attorney's office provides a transcript. The stated purpose is to assist the jury. The court gives a curative instruction that the video is evidence not the transcript. During a trial , I never watched the judge or jury during the video. I am concentrating on the video.Funny things happen when you watch.

Even though the judge told them the video was the evidence not the transcript , something happened . The jurors did not watch the video statements at all. They focused in on the transcript. The judge went to the transcript. The demeanor of the detectives and the witness was ignored.

Rule 1001 of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence provides ;

To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress or the Tennessee Legislature

From watching the trial today , it appears the transcripts outweigh what is on the evidence. The transcript trumps the video. Now i know why the district attorney provides the transcript.

Issues in Probation Violation Hearings

   In Tennessee Criminal courtrooms, probation violation hearings are sometimes difficult to win.  However, I ran across some good case law to help win these cases.

Often, a probation violation warrant is taken out due to a new criminal charge.  In State of Tennessee v. James Butler, the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee  held that a trial court may not rely on the mere fact of an arrest or indictment to revoke a defendant's probation.  The state must produce some evidence in the usual form of testimony in order to establish the probationer's commission of another offense while on probation.  Therefore, the state must put on proof rather than just relying on the testimony of the probation officer.

So, be mindful that the state must prove the new offense by a preponderance of the evidence. I hope you find this case useful.