Forensic video analysis: how to prove that dash camera footage is not telling the truth

With the abundance of video footage that is coming from dash cameras on passenger and commercial vehicles, data validation has become a front line the battle for the truth in the cases that come across our desk. 

This post will give an example of how data being reported from these systems can lead to improper assumptions of fault and wasted resources on civil cases in accident reconstruction.

Dash cameras are taking some of the guesswork out of accident reconstruction

Recon experts used to require vehicle inspections and site visits before they could determine the specifics of how an accident occurred, let alone challenge a police report that might misunderstand an accident sequence.

Even though dash camera video is now removing most of the unknown elements of the events leading up to and after a crash, taking all of the information at face value can lead to wrong conclusions that could waste time and money when the truth is identified later in the case.

Misreported speeds

Almost all modern fleet management systems report the vehicle speed on the video that is extracted after a crash.  Most of these systems are accurate enough to report speeds as a driver is moving down a highway, but fall short when reporting speeds during emergency braking.

Once we were sent a video where our 18-wheeler collided with a truck that pulled out in front of him as he was driving through an intersection. The video seemed to indicate that our truck's brakes might have been out of adjustment.

The dash camera video showed that our truck was traveling at 56 miles per hour when he slammed on his brakes.

Two seconds later, the reported speed had only reduced by 6 miles per hour.

Any jury would question why the truck was not able to slow down more than 6 miles per hour over 150 feet.

• In the world of accident reconstruction, this will often trigger forensic mechanical inspections of the truck and trailer brakes that can make the cost of trying a case outweigh the possible reward offered in a settlement. 

• In states like Virginia and Maryland where contributory negligence rules can bar plaintiffs from recovering damages if they are even found to be slightly at fault, attorneys might stop pursuing the case altogether.

Using forensic video analysis to show the true speed before impact

The dash camera's resolution and frame rate allowed me to verify the speed of the 18-wheeler with distances I could determine from looking at satellite imagery of the incident site.

Using a simple time and distance formula, I knew that the average speed during the braking was 7-14 miles per hour slower than what was being reported on the video. The attorney who hired us chose to proceed and the case was settled shortly after we submitted our report.

Other benefits of forensic video analysis

Using generally accepted forensic methodologies, we have been able to reliably prove:

• That other vehicles (not carrying dash cameras) are traveling above the speed limit as they approach a crash, even without the benefit of a black box download.

• That hard braking from an 18-wheeler driver directly contributed to his trailer moving into the lane next to him, even though the crash was not visible from the dash camera.

• That a vehicle next to a bus was clearly visible from the driver’s seat as he changed lanes causing a collision.

If you have questions about a video that has been produced in your case, call us for a free consultation or click here to have us reach out to you.