What are Legal Animations?
The term "legal animation" refers not to a theatrical portrayal but to a computer generated depiction of events as they are envisioned to have occurred. Generally, these portrayals are custom crafted to meet the needs of a particular case, to enlighten the judge or jury as to the physical attributes of a structure, object or other material matter, set into context by an explanation of its operation or the action taken with the object or structure. In this vein , the case presentation is woven into sequences of discrete animations (or still images) which are arranged sequentially or as illustrated in a storyboard. The speed of individual segments or frames may be determined as part of the animation production process towards enhancing the effectiveness of the presentation.
A specific application of legal animation is the depiction of accident scenes, people, vehicles, objects and locations relevant to a legal dispute. Legal animations and animations accompanying legal presentations have specific value as illustrative or demonstrative evidence. Courts across the country have granted varying degrees of admissibility for animation evidence of this type. Scientifically, legal animation may be used as part of expert witness testimony to demonstrate methods, procedures or standards of care.
Benefits of Legal Animations
Court cases are about communication. Your legal team must get up in front of the judge and jury and convey context to them; context about what happened and to express what should happen to the parties involved; context to explain the applicable law and how it applies to the facts; context that will bring them to a fair and just verdict. The jury must understand what they did not personally experience, and moreover, understand why and how it was the fault of the defendant, and why legal judgments should be returned accordingly. When dealing with complex information, the importance of interpreting complex facts into understandable context becomes even more crucial. It is in these cases that animations present truly valuable and necessary tools. Not only can animations help convey additional details for complex events but they also can help to underline specific issues or problems. Animation can make the pertinent facts more memorable. Animations can help create powerful connections to the facts or events that would otherwise be very difficult to explain. Furthermore, many studies continued to demonstrate that animations tend to bring people closer together on the litigated facts, which makes for much easier and less costly settlement negotiations. When the need arises to understand and convey complex and or difficult facts, and when the accuracy of those facts must be preserved, animation can become invaluable.
Categories of Legal Animations
There are a few different types of legal animations. And I’d like to take a look at each. I’m including 3D reconstructions, story boards and timelines.
3D Reconstructions
Most of the time when people think of a legal animation, they think of a 3D reconstruction. And for the most part that is true. These types of animations are usually based on police reports. In car accident cases, these might be accident reports, accident reconstruction reports, and maybe even diagrams. In a premises liability case, this might be a part of a property inspection report.
Storyboards
Story boards are just that…a storyboard. It is the artistic rendering of an event from the past. This is used to tell a story to a jury. This can be very useful in a criminal case where a criminal activity took place but only the suspects were present when it occurred. So you have to find a way to tell their story. They are talented artists that can draw a story where there are no witnesses.
Timelines
This is my least favorite and use of all the types of legal animations. But sometimes they can work well. Timelines are just that. They are a timeline of a particular event that is very important to a matter. This is usually used as a demonstrative exhibit and is powerful when done right. This is most useful in employment and age discrimination cases. And it is useful in class actions when you are trying to show a pattern over time. I’ve also seen them used in construction litigation.
Crafting Effective Legal Animations
Creating effective legal animations requires an ongoing communication process with the attorney, the client, and any experts who may be involved in the case. Development of any quality animation begins with detailed discussions of the accident or subject matter, which are then transformed into a sequential storyboard. This concept is then presented to the attorney for review and approval. Once the project is approved, we set to work and begin the process of modeling the various characters, structures, vehicles and any other objects needed for the project. Once all of the required elements are completed, the storyboard is used to direct the animations in a sequential manner. Once all sequences are rendered, we proceed to edit any required narration, sound effects, music or text sequences to match the timing of the animation. Finally, we assemble the entire project into the selected format.
Legal Animation Regulations and Guidelines
Legal guidelines and considerations are always top of mind when using animations, especially when presenting them at trial or in the courtroom. Knowledge of the legal standards for admissibility and the use of animations as demonstrative aids, as well as following those standards, is the best way to ensure their admissibility.
From Frye to Daubert
In the past, most courts analyzed the admissibility of animations using the Frye standard, which requires general acceptance of the practice or principle within the relevant scientific community. This meant that, before 2000 and prior to the Daubert ruling (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals), if an animation were to be admitted into evidence, there had to be testimony from an animator that the principles he used to animate were generally accepted in the artistic or scientific community. Since the Daubert ruling, the courts must now conduct a more thorough analysis of the technology, including an assessment of whether it was created by an expert in the field. The Daubert four-part test for admissibility now requires an analysis of whether the process used to create the animation (1) can/has been tested; (2) has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) has a known error rate; and (4) is generally accepted.
Fed. R. Evid. 402 – All Relevant Evidence is Admissible
If an animation is relevant to a case, under Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, it should be admissible. Rule 403 allows judges to exclude the animation if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or if it confuses or misleads the jury. If there is a valid scientific basis, it’s likely that the animation will pass both tests.
Admissibility
Rules 702 and 703 of the Federal Rules of Evidence govern the admissibility of expert testimony and require, among other things, that any testimony be based on sufficient facts and reliable principles . There must be an established link between the facts or data of the case, the principles in the art and science of computer-generated animations, and the expert’s conclusion in that area. Former Federal Rules of Evidence and Daubert expert testimony cases have discussed how animations that convey complex concepts that jurors may not readily understand and helping to explain the testimony of experts require admissibility of the narrative (the scientific concepts and contents) and the computer graphics supporting the testimony. And excluding admissibility of the narrative of a trial exhibit like a computer-generated animation based on this evidentiary consideration could be considered fundamental error.
It should be noted that Rule 611 (Conducting a Trial and Presenting Evidence) provides that "controllers of the exhibition of evidence … should have reasonable control over mode and order of interrogation …." Rule 611 can be invoked to assert that a witness should not testify while the jury looks at a computer-generated animation that is attempting to explain the scientific principles behind the expert’s testimony. What happens if the computer-generated animation is not necessarily the same one shown to the expert witness, and it shows more and less than what was explained (visually). Maybe the computer-generated animation accounts for the motion of the witness (and assumes that the witness did certain things – e.g., not keeping aware of the hazards). So, at trial, the proponent of the proffered demonstrative aid (the plaintiff’s lawyer) has power to select the animation that he wants shown to the jury and can control the information contained within. Yet the court cannot control the principles and facts on which the expert bases his conclusion.
Balancing these interests is the best course to take when deciding whether to admit a computer-generated animation at trial.
Case Studies: Successful Applications
Case studies outlining instances where animation and other trial technologies had a positive impact on the outcome of a case.
In 2008, the heart-pounding re-enactment of the four police officers whose lives were changed forever will be forever remembered as the most powerful part of a 35-minute video that helped convict a defendant in the brutal Miami Police Shootings. Prosecutors used animation throughout their entire case, allowing jurors the opportunity to follow the evidence separately from a witness’s testimony.
When an oil rig exploded off the coast of Texas in 2004 injuring 15 workers, the law firm of Vinson & Elkins turned to Sandy Sims to produce a video that would explain two things: how a blowout preventer is designed to stop oil rig explosions, and how one failed to protect the defendants’ rig.
When six Safeway delivery truck drivers died in transit across the Bay Bridge in 1993, the plaintiff lawyers hired Tom Taylor Associates and Sims Law Firm Video to animate a detailed explanation of why the accident had occurred. "The driver sat within four inches of the edge of a 44-foot trailer, so if an outer wheel should run up on a barrier strip, the driver had very little time to react," the animation said.
The Evolution of Legal Animations
Over the next ten years we will see the emergence of new 3D technology that will have a profound impact on the manner in which trial lawyers utilize animations to present a case. Ongoing research by computer scientists has focused on developing software that allows for both real-time rendering and intuitive performance tracking of virtual objects in a fully immersive environment. At present, the existing real-time rendering systems have high accuracy, wide field of view and high depth resolution at a consistent frame rate. However, the hardware required to run these systems is both prohibitively expensive and requires a large proprietary computer. In the coming years the cost of computer hardware will reduce , with GPUs becoming more accessible to lawyers and law firms. Additionally, newer technologies, like an occlusion method that utilizes the realtime data from a visor, will permit reliable occlusion of virtual scenes through visual occlusion. Occlusion will allow the presenting party to coordinate their gestures with the alterable virtual 3D world in real-time. Further, new Holographic display systems operating at microwave frequencies will permit passive 3D imaging that will make it seem as if the items are actually present in the courtroom. The increased prevalence of individual headsets will improve the affordability of the technology as a whole. However, this technology will remain confined to high-end personal devices as it is still in the early development stages.