Use of Video and Photo Evidence: Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
mNo edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
==Regina v. Creemer and Cormier, 1967 CanLII 711 (NS CA)<ref name="Creemer"/>==
==Regina v. Creemer and Cormier, 1967 CanLII 711 (NS CA)<ref name="Creemer"/>==


Page 22


:...


 
All the cases dealing with the admissibility of photographs go to show that such admissibility depends on (1) their accuracy in truly representing the facts; (2) their fairness and absence of any intention to mislead; (3) their verification on oath by a person capable to do so. (...)


<ref name="Creemer">Regina v. Creemer and Cormier, 1967 CanLII 711 (NS CA), <https://canlii.ca/t/hv151>, retrieved on 2021-12-13</ref>
<ref name="Creemer">Regina v. Creemer and Cormier, 1967 CanLII 711 (NS CA), <https://canlii.ca/t/hv151>, retrieved on 2021-12-13</ref>


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 17:38, 13 December 2021


Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved: 2024-05-07
CLNP Page ID: 1828
Page Categories: [Evidence Law]
Citation: Use of Video and Photo Evidence, CLNP 1828, <59>, retrieved on 2024-05-07
Editor: Sharvey
Last Updated: 2021/12/13


Regina v. Creemer and Cormier, 1967 CanLII 711 (NS CA)[1]

Page 22

...

All the cases dealing with the admissibility of photographs go to show that such admissibility depends on (1) their accuracy in truly representing the facts; (2) their fairness and absence of any intention to mislead; (3) their verification on oath by a person capable to do so. (...)

[1]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Regina v. Creemer and Cormier, 1967 CanLII 711 (NS CA), <https://canlii.ca/t/hv151>, retrieved on 2021-12-13