Video Attempting to Show Visibility Inadmissible

This post involves an accident that occurred on a dark night in February at the intersection of North Market Street and Havens Road in Shreveport, Louisiana.
The defendant, driving a flatbed trailer,  was hit by passenger vehicle that was travelling north on the dark highway. The truck driver was pulling onto the main highway and would have been looking south as the plaintiff approached.
The defendant driver had nearly completed his maneuver on to the highway when his trailer was hit on the left rear tandem. There was speculation that the plaintiff driver was under the influence of alcohol and that he was moving from the inside lane to the outside lane, but the initial investigation by the police was inadequate.  

Plaintiff’s accident reconstruction  expert purported  to represent the conditions of North Market Street at the time of the accident by a video that was  not an accurate representation of the road conditions at the time of the accident and would  likely confuse the jury.
Plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert recorded a video of the accident scene on a Sony Digital 8 after dark allegedly from the vantage point of each of the vehicles that were involved in the accident. His stated purpose for taking the video was:
(1) “to show the visibility of one vehicle from the vantage point of the other for each vehicle” and (2) “to show the movement of traffic through the intersection.” 

The expert’s deposition testimony revealed that he took no real precautions to ensure that the video accurately depicted  the conditions of the night of the accident. Relevant portions of the deposition secured the exclusion of the video:
Recent Posts