TN - Bill Passes That Allows Jurors To See In-Life Photographs

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by ~Lyric~, Apr 23, 2015.

  1. ~Lyric~

    ~Lyric~ Where is the Justice for Holly Bobo?

    Messages:
    1,592
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There has been a bit of debating on the issue of allowing Victims in life, before they were killed, photo's to juries.

    In Tennessee the bill just passed:

    Prosecutors and victims' rights advocates hailed the passage of the legislation as a return to portraying the dead as more than just a corpse. It comes during National Crimes Victims' Rights Week.

    Weirich said the in-life photographs allow the victims to be seen as more than a piece of evidence.



    http://www.scrippsmedia.com/newscha...ors-To-See-In-Life-Photographs-300931281.html


    The bill passed 86-1 in the Tennessee House of Representatives and 28-1 in the Tennessee State Senate.

    Read more: Bill allows pictures of murder victims to be shown at trials | Kingsport Times-News http://www.timesnews.net/article/90...r-victims-to-be-shown-at-trials#ixzz3Y9illvsc
    Follow us: @timesnewsonline on Twitter | timesnews on Facebook


    “The process of ensuring victim rights will continue,” said Guy Jones, deputy director of the Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference, which coordinated a two-year effort to get the legislature to set the newly passed policy. “The statute that was passed today is based on a statute in Oklahoma that has been reviewed and upheld in the courts. We look forward to the good it will do here in Tennessee.”

    http://wreg.com/2015/04/21/victim-life-photo-bill-passed-by-tennessee-general-assembly/
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Tulessa

    Tulessa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    22,163
    Likes Received:
    170
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I think this is a good thing.
     
  4. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I don't see a problem with it. Perhaps one of our lawyers will explain otherwise.
     
  5. Tawny

    Tawny Bye

    Messages:
    5,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I can see defense using this to their advantage, portraying the victim in less-than-stellar situations. Hm, I'm torn on this.
     
  6. LinasK

    LinasK Verified insider- Mark Dribin case

    Messages:
    24,159
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Seems like it would humanize the victim to the jury, unless you think the victim has a shady past...
     
  7. Tawny

    Tawny Bye

    Messages:
    5,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That's what I mean. If the, say, abuse/murder victim was a partier or a brawler who got in fights or something, and the defense tries to use that past to say "See, this person was no saint" or "This person was always getting themselves in trouble", that could be bad. To me, a victim's past doesn't matter, no matter how troubled, especially if the victim is murdered or abused. JMO! :)
     
  8. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I haven't see the language of the bill, but surely judges still have the right to refuse to admit evidence that is more prejudicial than probative. A nude shot of the victim, for example, would still be inadmissable, in most cases, because of the prejudicial nature of the photo.
     
  9. Tawny

    Tawny Bye

    Messages:
    5,574
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I would hope so! I definitely support it if that's the case :)
     
  10. wendybtn

    wendybtn Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,429
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice