24/7 writing help on your phone
Save to my list
Remove from my list
Yashawantrao Chavan Institute Of Science Satara
Abstract: In this paper I represent the overview of forensic animation. In this I will studied about the advantages, disadvantages and some previous papers of forensic animation. Forensic animation includes full motion computer graphics for creating those scenes which happen in accident, sink of building, an attack. For creating those scenes three diamentional animation is used. We also studied on previous paper which describes challenges for the computer animation in court and also the two types of forensic animation which are substantive and divine.
Keywords: Forensic, Three diamentional, Substantive, Divine
Forensic animation is the use of full motion computer graphics to recreate an event such as an car accident, the collapse of building, murder, aviation accident, railroad accident from variety of perspectives. Scenes are generated using various computer programs working in combination. Forensic experts, police officers, engineers & eyewitness collect & compile the data & supply it to the animators, they create a series of fixed videos images that are construction to create a cartoon movie like presentation of the event simulated audios is sometimes also used to create a short audio visual production.
A typical sequence in forensic animation consists of 30 frames per second, & lasts for several seconds. Scenes are generated using various computer programs working in combination.
In August of 1985 Delta flight 191 crashed while attempting a landing at Dallas /Ft Worth Airport. Caught in a powerful wind vortex, the plane was plunged into the earth a mile form the runway.
The crash resulted in the deaths of 137 people and extensive property damage. There followed a monstrous legal battle over who would pay for an estimated $150 million to $200 million in claims for wrongful death and loss of property.
Claims were made against the Federal Aviation Administration and National Weather Service for negligence in failure to advise the crew of the impending weather conditions. One of the results of this landmark case was the first major use of computer animation in the courtroom. It was not lost on the government attorneys, that complex fact or technical issues have a tendency to overwhelm jurors.
A method was required to explain complicated information and situations while holding the attention of the jury. As part of the government's presentation, a 45-minute computer generated presentation was created to explain the intricacies of the evidence and thus began forensic animation, a new field of collaboration between art and science. It is important to note that that the US Government won that case and the animated presentation given no small amount of credit for the win. The legal world has not been the same since.
At that time, animations were created using very expensive Unix-based workstations. Costs were often quoted as $1000 to $3000 per finished second of animation. Since then, there has been a revolution in computing, bringing near "super computer" power to the average desktop system.
Today, it's not unusual to discuss off the shelf software, hundreds of megabytes of RAM and a gig hertz of processing power as being the "norm" for high-end relatively inexpensive desktop computer graphics systems. What was once $1000 to $3000 per finished second is now competitively priced at $50 to $100 per finished second with a quality far greater then was available in the 1980s. The animation field has grown exponentially and the use of forensic animation is quickly becoming a common occurrence in the courtrooms of the 21st century.
3. Defining the Forensic process
The successful use of the 3D technology described above in a courtroom raises the question of whether there are any other parts of the forensic process that may be suited to the use of modern digital technologies. In order to define areas of the forensic process which may be enhanced by novel digital technology use, it is necessary first to break down the process into its constituent phases. Many books and papers have been published that summarise the steps involved in forensic investigation into generalized stages. These publications usually incorporate similar steps, although the nomenclature and the order may vary slightly. More recently, researchers have tried to generalize models for digital forensic investigations. Carrier and Spafford suggested describing a linked digital and physical forensic examination, assuming that each individual digital device was treated as a separate crime scene. A computer is considered as a single piece of physical evidence at a crime scene, but it may contain hundreds of discrete and vital pieces of digital evidence. The investigation of the digital and physical crime scenes could then take place independently, whilst using evidence from one to guide further investigation in the other. This arrangement also allows the digital investigation to be structured in a similar way to the 'tried and tested' structure of the physical investigation. illustrates a generic flow diagram developed by the author based upon work conducted by Carrier and Spafford . As illustrated in the forensic process is both complicated and iterative, but it can be divided into three major phases, those of evidence collection, evidence analysis and evidence presentation.
If one were forced to pick only the major categories of technology that are likely to be of the greatest importance in the next ten years, they would be the use of electronic information, high-technology court records, technologically augmented evidence, and argument presentation and video communications via videoconferencing. Just as electronic filing and integrated electronic case management systems4 hold enormous promise for decreasing case delays with concomitant personnel decreases, the use of case-related information stored and presented electronically is of great importance. When all documents related to the case, whether administrative or evidentiary, are stored directly on a network or are obtainable by computer from storage media, enormous time and cost savings will result. Not only will delays in finding and presenting information be minimized or eliminated, the need for storage of these materials will largely be obviated. Imaging is the key to this result. At present, most case-related document imaging is done by lawyers either for litigation support purposes or, occasionally, because judges have required it directly or indirectly. Yet, the court itself has an interest in requiring imaging as the actions of a number of federal judges suggest. The court clerk can create a bare-bones imaging system, if adequately designed, that will produce a basic CD-ROM or DVD-based collection of accurate imaged documents for use by counsel or judge. Elimination of the litigation support aspect should make this approach affordable and economical.
We stand on the verge of useful multimedia trial records.5 Accessed by a real-time stenographic transcript, these records will permit review of the transcript, audio, video, and all presented evidence via CD-ROM. Courts can choose which components to use, and when necessary, appellate judges can both see and hear critical testimony, for the first time instantly found by use of the electronic transcript.
Technology-presented evidence and argument permit counsel to present information far more clearly than ever before and often in less time than they would have been able to without the technological assistance.6 Here, television merges with computer stored and created information to create extraordinary capabilities. Courtroom designers and managers must concern themselves not only with the types of information to be used at trial, and their sources, but also with how that information will be displayed--by computer monitors, ordinary televisions, or front projection systems. Judges must be concerned with the possibility of undue prejudice, as the display method itself may affect the way that jurors or judges will evaluate the conveyed information.
There are basically two types of animations, substantive and devine. A substantive animation is where physically accurate simulation software is used to provide the movement of objects based on data inputs. A common example is an automobile collision where the accident reconstruction is the begin by collecting all the necessary data such as the terrain geometry, road conditions, vehicle specifications, impact speeds, friction coefficients, etc. This data is then input into the simulation software and the output is a set of data which describes the motion of objects. Many simulation programs also have the option to graphically animate the results of the simulation although, most are still lacking in the level of realism. Alternatively, the data may be output to another 3D animation program which can provide a much more realistic and higher quality animation. It is important to understand that the movement of objects is calculated based on dynamics and physically accurate mathematical equations.
Demonstrative animations (which are perhaps the most common), vary from showing how a mechanical device may have failed to how a medical procedure may have gone wrong. These are simply informative recreations based on data supplied to the animator and normally confirmed by an expert. Demonstrative animations may also be used to recreate vehicle collisions; however the animator or accident reconstructionist would provide the basis for the movement and timing of the vehicles as opposed to a simulation program.
Regardless of which type of animation is used, they still need to be accurate and should normally have solid data or reference materials to aid in there construction.
6. The challenges for computer animation in the courtroom
A visual image can have a very strong impact on a jury. Such images can be easily manipulated, and the potential for misleading a jury is ever present. A good example of this (in a situation that is analogous to a computer simulation) is Gladhill v. General Motors. In this case, a videotaped demonstration (by the defense) of the braking characteristics of a 1980 Chevrolet Citation was admitted into evidence. The issue was that the Plaintiff's accident occurred at night, on a sharp downhill curve, and the Defense's demonstration was done in the daytime, on level ground, and was conducted by an experienced test driver. The defence tried toargue that the test was not a reconstruction of the accident, but rather "ademonstration of certain operating characteristics of the vehicle in question". The court of appeal did not agree with this argument and held that such evidence was misleading: It is easy to understand why the jury might be unable to visualise the plaintiffs' version of events after watching this video. Indeed, the circumstances of the accident, as alleged, were so different from the demonstration as to make the results largely irrelevant if not misleading . There is a great deal of scope for tampering with the evidence in computer-generated displays. This possibility was recognised in the dissenting judgement of Justice Van Graafeiland in the US case of Perma Research & Development v Singer . The learned judge stated that although a computer has tremendous potential for generating more meaningful evidence, "it presents a real danger of being the vehicle for introducing erroneous, misleading or unreliable evidence." Even where there is no deliberate attempt to tamper with the evidence, computer-generated displays can be unintentionally misleading. Computer animations in particular rely a great deal upon data collection, human judgement and speculation at each step of the animation process. In view of the potential for misleading the jury and tampering with the evidence, it is evident that the most vital issue in animation is the reliability and accuracy of the information that may be used to create the animation. Two questions that may be regarded as essential in this respect are the objective of the animation, e.g. the police investigator instructed the animator to animate the evidence demonstrating that the car had made the turn at the junction, hence, the sequence of animation shows that the car driver could not see the motorbike coming from the opposite direction; and what is the critical issue(s) from the judge and jurors' point of view, e.g. the trial may look at various traffic offences with regard to the accident. Several courts have voiced specific criteria that an animation must meet before it can be admitted as evidence :- x The animation must be a fair and accurate representation of the evidence to which it relates; x It must be relevant; and x Its probative value must substantially outweigh the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury. A computer animation is predominantly used only as a presentation tool; it is not often used as an analytical tool. An animation is usually created based on information provided by a witness or data provided by an expert.
Increasing computer power is quickly making it possible to introduce real time photo-realistic rendering into the courtroom. Is this something that is desired? Who is technically able to determine the veracity of this type of evidence? Is the sheer artistry of this technology defeating its original purpose as a way to visualize facts or is it creating its own reality? Usually parties have exchanged all documents, including computer animations, in advance of the trial. Attempts to s sn't tolerated. Should scientific forensic animation be considered 'new evidence'urprise opposing counsel with 'new' evidence is an old trick and usually i? If the programming takes all the facts into account shouldn't it be allowed if the rules of evidence state "all relevant evidence is admissible"?
One day soon, it may even be possible to admit fully immersive photo-realistic virtual reality into the courtroom. In this case, the jury would move from viewing the world through a monitor to actually 'living' in it. The 'reality' effect would then increase exponentially as would questions of prejudice. The technology could also hinder rather than assist the judicial system in its major function - to resolve disputes - if both sides in a case presented their differing versions of the facts in virtual evidence. This could lead to severe juror confusion and more hung juries. Turning jurors into witnesses or active fact finders would be nothing less then a revolution in the legal system. So what is the next step? Do we frantically try to close Pandora's Box, turning back the clock by outlawing this powerful presentation technology or do we set standards and guidelines as to its use and embrace it's unique ability to inform, educate and visualize ideas and concepts? There are many questions that remain unanswered and the jury is still out.
This paper has highlighted History, Forensic processing, Technology, Challenges for computer animation in the courtroom, Future of forensic animation. It underlines the fact that, until recently, 3D forensic reconstruction techniques have been used (along with other multimedia technologies) mainly to present forensic evidence in the courtroom. The technologies have been targeted in this area due to their success in communicating highly complex, technical spatial and temporal evidential information to the general public.
 Schofield, D ., DENBY, B, AND HOLLANDS, R. Mine safety in 21st century. Future article
 Noond, j; Schofield, D. Visualising the scene - Litigation Graphics And Virtual Reality.
 Schofield, D ., DENBY, B, AND HOLLANDS, B, AND HOLLANDS, R. Mine Safety in the 21st century; The Application of Computer Graphics and Virtual Reality
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.get help with your assignment