Analyst: Evaluates the evidence collected by the investigator to determine whether it is relevant and whether or not it would be admissible in court. Reviews the opposition’s evidence to determine whether there is any way to exclude it from being used at trial. Reports findings and conclusions about the evidence to the lawyer. Lawyer: Evaluates all the evidence to establish the facts of the case and determine how best to bring a case against an alleged perpetrator or defend a person who has been accused of a crime. Develops the legal strategy and arguments. Asks the court for permission to submit evidence and then presents the evidence to judges and juries. Judge: Decides whether evidence meets legal standards and, in turn, whether the evidence will be admitted into court. Hears cases, listens to witness testimony, reviews all the evidence submitted during a trial, poses procedural decisions, and delivers the final decision on the guilt or innocence of defendants when a jury is not present. When a jury is present, the judge instructs the jury on what to consider when deciding whether the defendant is guilty or innocent. Jury: Responsible for deciding — based only on the facts of the case — whether a person is guilty or innocent of the crime with which he or she has been charged. This decision can be based only on the evidence introduced in court and the directions of the judge. FROM AN EXPERT ILLUSTRATING THE VALUE OF FRONTLINE DEFENDERS In Brazil, if a police officer is accused of shooting someone without cause, there is only a 0.8% chance that the state prosecutor’s office will investigate violent confrontation cases involving the police. Often, the officer’s false version of events becomes the official story — unless there is a video. Priscila Neri, Senior Program Manager at WITNESS, reflects on the situation in Brazil: “[It’s] fascinating to look back … and realize how important video had been to break this engrained pattern of impunity. Against all odds, the existence of a [bystandershot] video often served as a real hope—sometimes the only hope—for truth and accountability in cases of violence perpetrated by police. Video provided undeniable evidence, dismounted false narratives, and helped ramp up the pressure on the processes, institutions, and authorities responsible for ensuring justice … It’s as if the existence of a video is the best way to ensure the word of a police officer does not prevail over the silence of a dead victim.” Stories similar to this are echoed across the globe and illustrate the invaluable role frontline documenters play in collecting information that can be used to protect human rights — whether it’s outside or inside a courtroom. Read more from Neri on the issue: bit.ly/PoliceAbuse_Brazil. 15 VIDEO AS EVIDENCE: VIDEO BEYOND THE COURTROOM V 1.0 LAW Investigator: Collects evidence to solve crimes and then sifts through that evidence, making an initial decision about what is valuable and what is not. Reports findings and conclusions to the analyst.