this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
43 points (100.0% liked)

United Kingdom

5301 readers
195 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Why would you need witnesses when you have video evidence?

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Witnesses need to introduce the evidence as to where they got it, where it was recorded, and how it was recorded, and if it was edited or it's hearsay and inadmissible. These are common law evidence rules that are older than modern police forces and predate either pictures or video to where you were arguing about a tally stick contact. That said, the cops only want to be the sole depondent for citation level crimes usually so they've decided they don't want to do the legwork of getting the person who recorded it to be the witness. They just don't want to do the work. They'll come up with reasons for that, but that's the core.