17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha

Those sheriffs were pretty cool about it. “Want to take my rifle?”, “no, just keep your hands there.”

And rather than arrest him for being within 1k ft of a school without a CC license, they let him know about the law and what he needs to do to comply with it.
So with a CC license you can carry near a school? Even if he's not carrying concealed?
 
Those sheriffs were pretty cool about it. “Want to take my rifle?”, “no, just keep your hands there.”

And rather than arrest him for being within 1k ft of a school without a CC license, they let him know about the law and what he needs to do to comply with it.
A CC license to open carry a rifle?! f***ing ****** bullshit.
 
So with a CC license you can carry near a school? Even if he's not carrying concealed?
A CC license to open carry a rifle?! f***ing ****** bullshit.
Who knows, maybe Wisconsin has a weird section of law that permits carrying a firearm near a school as long as you have a CC license.

Kinda like how you can’t carry on an ATV or snowmobile in NH unless you have a license.
 
image_fc769351813bd6e8520358af88abe3b916b55e20.png
 


Found the blog. The post is not the complete story and is misleading. There are 2 "methods" the software has to enhance images / videos. Algorithm based and AI based.
If the Algorithm based operations were used, then its fine as evidence. AI is only good for investigations.

PS: i would argue that the result of the enhancing in regaurds to this case, is fricking useless.
 
the prosecution withheld a higher resolution video and we didn't find out about it until after final arguments
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)

Suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused who has requested it violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.
Evidence that is exculpatory, such as out of court statements of other parties (Ziminskis), video footage, etc. is subject to automatic mandatory discovery.

This is what they are talking about when you hear the term "Brady Evidence". (also Rule 14 under Mass. Rules of Crim. Pro.)
 
Last edited:
I’m guessing that’s the video that they currently want to review again right? Can we see this video?

The prosecution gave 1/4th height 1/16th res version during discovery, excuse was 'we just uploaded it and accidentally compressed the shit out of it'

the lawyer in me would argue that its not clear which video was played during the trial

defense was playing the video and fat f*** messed up and said 'our video looks better' and that's what turned everyone onto it
 
The prosecution gave 1/4th height 1/16th res version during discovery, excuse was 'we just uploaded it and accidentally compressed the shit out of it'

the lawyer in me would argue that its not clear which video was played during the trial

defense was playing the video and fat f*** messed up and said 'our video looks better' and that's what turned everyone onto it
You would think that the court system would have a way to validate digital evidence by now to ensure everyone has the same, unaltered content. MD5 hashes for example.
 
For you smart computer people:

How much, would it matter, if the source/original video was a much lower resolution than the ADA used in the closing?

That the ADA used an AI/algorithim enhanced video and that is the HiDef video they gave to the Defense after closing statements. The HiDef is actually an altered video all along.
 
For you smart computer people:

How much, would it matter, if the source/original video was a much lower resolution than the ADA used in the closing?

That the ADA used an AI/algorithim enhanced video and that is the HiDef video they gave to the Defense after closing statements. The HiDef is actually an altered video all along.
resolution = pixels. The more original, unaltered pixels - the better the image quality and the better the quality - the less blur will occur when you zoom in.
When an image is enhanced, pixels are beeing added and the colors of those pixels are "guessed". You can read here about AI vs Algorithm here:
 
Last edited:
For you smart computer people:

How much, would it matter, if the source/original video was a much lower resolution than the ADA used in the closing?

That the ADA used an AI/algorithim enhanced video and that is the HiDef video they gave to the Defense after closing statements. The HiDef is actually an altered video all along.
I don’t think that’s the case. I believe the high res video is the actual uncompressed feed from the aircraft. Edit: it was security camera footage not aircraft surveillance video.

However, if someone used computer vision algorithms to increase the resolution, if you want to maintain the frame rate then the algorithm would need to use AI to essentially interpret the image and add data. That would be a no go for evidence.

If you don’t mind losing frames, then you can utilize a super-resolution algorithm to take a 1-n series of video frames, and then combine noisy data across the frames into one less noisy and higher res image. I wouldn’t have a problem with this algorithm being used to show say, a license plate. But it may be problematic for identifying a person’s face that is moving around. The algorithm works better with stationary objects.
 
Back
Top Bottom