With video devices being so cheap and available(I have one for my Crown Vic) everyone, including lawyers, are wondering why video is usually absent in DUI cases. Obviously, it could be used as the biggest piece of evidence either way. A Utah DUI lawyer(Jason Schatz) is angry with the matter:

“It’s only fair to those people if the technology is available”, he says.  Schatz defends suspected drunk drivers and says often, police video is valuable evidence in court, challenging officers’ written reports.   “You look at the police report and you’d think this person was falling down drunk, then you see the tape and you say ‘Wait a minute, that doesn’t look the way it was described on paper”.  Schatz says he wants Utah to adopt mandatory videotaping like the State of South Carolina.  He hopes to find a local lawmaker who will take the issue to Capitol Hill.

Schatz has compiled videotapes shot during sobriety test of several clients.  Some of the tapes conflict with what the officer wrote down in the report.  Often Schatz says, cases are dropped when the jury or the prosecutor see the tape.

I can’t believe this is an issue. What a crock of you know what. Here is another DUI lawyer’s opinion on the matter.