Snow_death 0 Posted January 22, 2008 Do you need some kind of certification to install cameras in a jewelry store? I just seen an advertisement on TV about it. I have been installing cameras for a few months now and never have I been asked for a certification for their insurance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crirvine 0 Posted January 23, 2008 It depends on what state you live in and when the judge ask what class, certifications and who your insurance carrier is when you go to court because of something that the recorder did or did not record. The system you sell and install you are the the responsible party for its operation. Is it recording was it installed correctly all of the things you are trained in classes and states that require license to install cctv. As an installer builder of DVR's I have been to court 4 times in 3 years just to testify that the image on the cd was taken from the dvr by me given to the police and was not tampered with in any fashion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snow_death 0 Posted January 23, 2008 I live in Texas, do you know about the laws here regarding licenses? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scruit 0 Posted January 23, 2008 It depends on what state you live in and when the judge ask what class, certifications and who your insurance carrier is when you go to court because of something that the recorder did or did not record. The system you sell and install you are the the responsible party for its operation. Is it recording was it installed correctly all of the things you are trained in classes and states that require license to install cctv. As an installer builder of DVR's I have been to court 4 times in 3 years just to testify that the image on the cd was taken from the dvr by me given to the police and was not tampered with in any fashion. Did you have to *prove* that the images were not tampered with (ie watermark etc), or demonstrate the imge recovery steps? Or just state that the images are as on the DVR. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crirvine 0 Posted January 24, 2008 That the saved images and video are the untampered with same images as on the dvr. Original as if it were a vhs tape from a timelapse recorder or 35mm photo camera. And that I am the one that removed said images from the dvr and saved them to cd for court. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scruit 0 Posted January 24, 2008 That the saved images and video are the untampered with same images as on the dvr. Original as if it were a vhs tape from a timelapse recorder or 35mm photo camera. And that I am the one that removed said images from the dvr and saved them to cd for court. Ok, so they took you on your word that the images and chain of custody was as you described it - instead of requiring you to produce actual evidence that the images were original (ie bringing the DVR in to court) I've been wondering what challenges I may face in court if I ever need to use my CCTV video in a prosecution. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scorpion 0 Posted January 25, 2008 I would say the higher the degree of the crime, then the higher degree of "chain of custody" will be needed. Fender bender repairs in court verses murder/rape/kidnapping may be handled differently. I do not have much experience in this, so take what I say with a grain of salt. Plan for the worse, and hope for the best! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crirvine 0 Posted January 25, 2008 It for the most part someone trying to challenge the new dvr's. With state license, FBI background checks, and factory training it was not a big ordeal. You just tell them what the prossess of saving the data and how it is secured and then there is nothing to fuss over. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scruit 0 Posted January 25, 2008 It for the most part someone trying to challenge the new dvr's.With state license, FBI background checks, and factory training it was not a big ordeal. You just tell them what the prossess of saving the data and how it is secured and then there is nothing to fuss over. When I took pictures of a fender-bender I witnessed and testified in court, I was asked by the plaintiff's lawyer to explain how the pictures got from my phone the printout. This was to show he judge that I hadn't messed with the pictures. I just said that the pictures were taken by my cellphone with the defendant and plaintiff present, emailed to my home computer then printed on a Sony photo printer. Judge was happy with that - although the defendant never challenged the pictures and the bodyshop manager said that the damage to the plaintiff's car was exactly like picture I took. There really was no challenge. I'm not concerned about the 'overall' cameras being challenged in cvourt if someone breaks into my house - but I can see them simply denying that they are the person depicted in the pictures. That's when I hope my 'identification' cameras (LP, close-up of face at each doorway etc) will help me out. I can see stills being challenged more than the video... And the CPCam usb export is in a prioprietrary format with a watermark and the claim is that they can't be tampered with. Hopefully I can use the proprietary player as evidence that the video is good. Of course, I do expect that someone stealing a couple thousand bucks in property from house would require less validation and verification than if I caught a murder or rape etc on tape. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
