With the multitude of technological resources now available to trial attorneys, the question of admissibility of technologically generated demonstrative evidence, and the weight such evidence is given by judges and juries, remains significant.
In the past, trial counsel in medical malpractice and personal injury actions that center on missed radiological findings would arrive at trial with sleeves of original radiology films and a light box. Films are now nearly exclusively produced in a digital format and viewed via computer. In such cases, even slight changes in contrast and brightness can turn innocuous findings into remarkable evidence of disease. As such, the admissibility of such images faces substantial new challenges. Not only must attorneys confront issues surrounding how these images are produced, but also how they were seen by a radiologist at the time of the alleged negligence, and under what conditions they were produced or altered as demonstrative aids at trial.
