Additionally, citizens could film uniforms, insignias, patches, or equipment used by the soldiers committing the crimes to show the troops were in fact Bemba’s soldiers instead of members of a different army. Public sharing of this type of footage would also put Bemba on notice, preventing him from plausible deniability. TAKE HOME POINTS BEMBA - A KNOWDEDGABLE COMMANDER First, to be held accountable, a remote commander must have “known or should have known” his or her people were committing crimes. To prove this, investigators and lawyers gather “notice evidence” which is simply information that would have communicated that the crimes were taking place. Second, video can demonstrate that a high-level commander had knowledge of crimes, but it requires planning and strategy to capture video that meets the legal requirements needed for evidence. Third, if safe, it could be important to publish “notice evidence” — such as troops committing crimes or speeches of officials detailing crimes — widely because it may someday prevent a perpetrator from being able to say, “I did not know” during his or her trial. 127 VIDEO AS EVIDENCE: PROVING RESPONSIBILITY V 1.0 FILMING Video clips of: • Speeches where Bemba acknowledges crimes; • The commission of crimes or the aftermath of the crimes broadcast on television or over the Internet on platforms Bemba would be likely to see; • The commission of crimes or the aftermath accompanying written NGO reports that are widely distributed; • Bemba using communications technologies; • Bemba in the field with his troops in CAR; and • Speeches by UN officials presenting evidence of the crimes on the world stage.