Photographs o as a general rule it has to be factually logically relevant o admissible because relevance is very flexible if the support or illustrate

ate witness testimony demonstrative evidence graphic picture or diagram help people understand things helps jury understand the testimony o they must be factually relevant they have to be the Real thing has to be the picture of the intersection the real thing has to be the factual foundation to prove what you have here is what you claim it to be o diagram or photograph sufficiently accurate fair and accurate representation of the intersection as it appeared on November 9, 2007 at about 10 am someone has to lay the foundation have to put a witness on stand who is competent to testify that exhibit one is a fair and accurate representation blah blha blha who is competent to testify on that someone who was at the intersection on that day date time etc its a leading question but you are allowed you have to lay the foundation that the person can lay the foundation for the photograph explain why his familiar with the intersection o is a photograph or video evidence in and of itself or is it illustrative of evidence videos of crime the rule is that they are illustrative of the evidence and the reason is that is a distrust of photographic representation and videos because they can be doctored and changed the video illustrates the evidence and it is not the evidence itself rare exception in one of the note cases barges floating on the river and hit things and then barge disappears o photo of barge with number on it Weinstein said that was evidnence but this was a rare case