[boublepop]

I think it’s ok to select jurors based some basic abilities. I don’t know if this considered discrimination based on IQ in the US. But if a grown person has the mind of a 5year old or doesn’t know how to walk up stairs I think it’s fair to say “you shouldn’t be in a jury”. Likewise if a person doesn’t understand the concept of zooming an image or slow motion, then I think it’s quite fair to exclude them from jury duty.

[literallyaduck]

Understand concepts and removing bias are totally different.

Consider:

https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-slow-mo...

https://law.temple.edu/aer/2021/02/08/selectively-trusting-s...

It is also clear that digital photography from phones is far from an accurate representation of events.

[boublepop]

> It is also clear that digital photography from phones is far from an accurate representation of events.

True, but if you exclude any evidence that is “far from an accurate representation of events” then we have no legal system left. Eye witness reports isn’t reliable, DNA evidence isn’t reliable. A case is built on the sum of many unreliable parts, and there a smartphone video or photo is at least significantly more reliable than eye witness accounts.