atkphotoworks

For me, India represents a diversity of all kinds of interesting

characters, flavours, personalities etc...and includes both

the "dreary" and the "shining" and points in between under one roof.<div></div>

Buck, I think the others above pretty much had it right. I just finished law school and what I remember from evidence class is that when presenting evidence (in this case - a photograph), the attorney will have you lay the foundation and will show you the print from the photo. Ask you whether you took it and if it's a fair and accurate representation of what you photgraphed etc. However, if the other side attempts to impeach you about the source, i.e. digital photography, there may of course be issues of whether it was doctored etc...Furthermore, it may largely depend on the jurisdiction and the rules of evidence in which they apply. Some may allow it and other may not.

The issue of digital photography in the trial process was something that interested me. Nevertheless, I would go for straight film and at least that way you can produce the negative if any questions are asked as to the accuracy and integrity of the source of the image.

However, your friend should also consult an attorney as to what the Utah rules of evidence allows as for digital photography submitted as evidence etc...It might save time and rest a few doubts.

BTW Mark you were two 2/3s correct...

The third is actually argue Public Policy if there are no facts or law to support you. Hell it worked for Thurgood Marshall when he argued Brown v. Topeka Board of Education.