Is the data you gather with a data collector such as the Trimble TSC2 admissible evidence in court?
If so, why?
If not, why?
> Is the data you gather with a data collector such as the Trimble TSC2 admissible evidence in court?
Just as with field notes, I think it would be a very unusual circumstance in which digital survey data were allowed as evidence. Digital data is way too easy to falsify, and virtually impossible to substantiate as accurately representing measurements. It might be used by a witness to refresh his memory of actions he took, but otherwise I can't see it being allowed.
So traditional, hand-written field notes in a weatherproof field book are no more admissible as evidence than electronic field notes?
I think if you say in court this is where the line is or this is where i interpret the corner to be that your license speaks for you that you are qualified to make this determination...I don't think the courts care how you came to that decision with computations...field notes written or digital for the most part.
I am seeing we are moving into a total digital recording age... using tablets instead of the write in the rain and pentel set up we are presently comfortable with.
I agree. I have been an expert witness once, no field notes were presented, required or questioned. I know that has been drummed into our heads, BUT the argument is going to center around testimony about what you found and ultimately your professional opinion AND not how or what you recorded your field notes on. It usually comes to disputed evidence, the intent of the parties AND often what is an equitable solution AND not disputed measurements.
Someone that has been to court a lot more than me might see it differently...
SHG
I've been at this game over 40 years and in court a whole lot of times. I have never been asked about my data gathering techniques. Never been asked for my field book. Never questioned about electronic data. etc. etc.
I have been questioned about what I found, how I used it, and how I arrived at my conclusions.
Maybe I'll be surprised next time, but I think all this concern about field notes is an old wives tale and a lot of unsubstantiated anecdotes.
I've never been asked for field book data, either.
In a court case where the adjoiner pulled up my stakes, his attorney asked if I took pictures of the stakes. I replied, "No, but I have coordinates of the stakes that I set." No more questions about this. Court ruled for my client, neighbor had to pay to re-set the stakes.
I have never been questioned about my field notes, either.
However, you would be surprised at what can be introduced as evidence.
I can't imagine any reason that an electronic field notes couldn't be introduced as "normal business practice" if you wanted.
To answer the question first posed: I believe the issue would become one of custody of the record from the time it was created until the same record is being introduced. Where it goes from there is anyone's guess.
I think there is considerable case law on accounting issues that will give you some guidance.
daw
Sure it's allowed, all kinds of electronic data has been admitted by the courts. Most survey maps these days are a print out of electronic data rather than hand drawn. Just has to be authenticated, relevant, and material.
> Is the data you gather with a data collector such as the Trimble TSC2 admissible evidence in court?
>
> If so, why?
>
> If not, why?
I agree, that field notes are rarely offered in court, unless they contain pertinent evidence. The real facts are found in the conclusions drawn from the evidence.
However... that doesn't answer the question "why" at all. The answer is found in the Civil Rules of Evidence. The courtroom procedures are highly governed by the rules of evidence and the rules of procedure. There are Federal rules (which have been adopted in most states) and there are State rules. Every surveyor should be familiar with the rules (and most of us are without knowing it), because the rules govern how we gather evidence, how we interpret evidence, and how we derive facts from evidence. We do it all the time; we just aren't taught where the "survey principles" come from.
Here are a few quotations from the Federal Rules of Evidence:
>>Rule 1001. Definitions That Apply to This Article
>>In this article:
>>(a) A “writing” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form.
>>(b) A “recording” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent recorded in any manner.
>>(c) A “photograph” means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in any form.
>>(d) An “original” of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it. For electronically stored information, “original” means any printout — or other output readable by sight — if it accurately reflects the information. An “original” of a photograph includes the negative or a print from it.
>>(e) A “duplicate” means a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic, or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original.
>>Rule 1002. Requirement of the Original
>>An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise.
>>Rule 1003. Admissibility of Duplicates
>A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original’s authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate.
Read through the rules and see how many of them relate to the evidence we daily rely upon to make property boundary determinations. You'll be quite surprised at how many of the rules you know and practice.
It's the law. That's "why."
JBS
I too have heard many people express that "one of them computer things will never be allowed in court here in our state".
Please, stop it. Just stop.
To add to what JB said above, think about this.
Suppose you use both a data collector and a field book to record every measurement you make on a job.
Now suppose you get back to the office and find the DC file and the field book disagree. Which source do you trust more?
Not saying you don't go back to the field and confirm; but, until that is done I know which of the two I trust every single time. (Hint, not the field book.)
Larry P
This puts the nail in the coffin for sure. Thank you very, very much JB. Why is electronic data admissible in court? Because the Federal Rules of Evidence say it is.....can't get much sweeter than that. As mentioned below, my question originated due to an argument with someone who doesn't trust technology that I should be writing down the GPS measurement data in a traditional fieldbook because the electronic information would never be allowed in court. I'm not exactly sure how you can record raw GPS observation data with nothing but a paper fieldbook and no electronic fieldbook, but I'd love to watch someone try. On the spot my explanation was based more on common sense than anything else because writing the GPS-derived coordinates down with pencil and paper wouldn't prove that the data wasn't tampered with, as he was arguing. In fact it would seem more likely for a transcription error to occur while copying the lat and long, bearings, distances, etc. from the screen into the book, so why would a hand-written version be any more acceptable and reliable to a court of law than the electronic version of the exact same thing when the original derivation of the data was electronic? In my eyes the original is the electronic version and the paper fieldbook version is the copy.
I really like the point that is being made that the method of data collection isn't the real focus in court; it's the evidence and conclusions drawn from the data that is what the judge actually cares about. Being that's the case, it would seem that making sure you're setting up the GPS rod on the correct spot after evaluating the corner evidence is a LOT more important than worrying whether the judge will toss out your measurement data (if he/she even asks for it at all) because it wasn't handwritten. I've never been to court since I've only been in the profession a few years so far, but that is very valuable information and advice. Thank you guys for that.
