[jjk166]

Or perhaps the standards of evidence established for a pre-industrial society when eye-witness testimony was the best that could reasonably be achieved is not necessarily the optimal system for a digital society where everyone carries a high definition video camera in their pocket at all times.

[DiscourseFan]

Yes a high definition video camera that is slowly becoming indistinguishable (and has always been subject to tampering regardless) from an artificially generated version. We never have anything beyond judgement.

[expedition32]

This is why crimes used to have prosecution time limits. Nobody expected eye witness accounts to surface after 40 years. But DNA is eternal.

[DiscourseFan]

DNA is not eternal, but neither is anyone's memory trustworthy for that long.

[cucumber3732842]

Prosecution time limits and those pesky rights people have is why so much stuff that would've been simple misdemeanors 70+yr ago is now "administrative" and "civil" law.

[broken-kebab]

But in what way do you believe these standards are inadequate? Video from phones is used in courts when available and admissible.