Rapper, R. Kelly, is on trial at the Cook County Courthouse for an alleged sexual act with a minor. The agitating evidence is a video tape. The Chicago Tribune follows the case Gavel to Gavel . When can video tape be used in court?
A legal source close to me writes, "A videotape can come in if/when: 1) relevant 2) it's probative value is outweighed by prejudice to the other side and if in lieu of live testimony, there needs to be some indicia of it being trustworthy... A tape of the DEFENDANT (or any party) is almost always admissible/relevant because it is perceived as some kind of admission."
With the tape already been shown to the jury, the jury must now decide how much weight to give the evidence. The defense has shown how easy it is to change the tape and has repeatedly shown that R. Kelly does not have the birthmark mole that is shown on the tape. In addition, the tape was lost for over a year before it surfaced in the hands of a Tribune reporter.
The burden of proof is heavy in a criminal court. I look for the jury to acquit.