Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)[1], was a United States Supreme Court case

1
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)1, was a
United States Supreme Court case

• in which the prosecution had withheld from the
  criminal defendant certain evidence. The
  defendant challenged his conviction, arguing it
  had been contrary to the Due Process Clause of
  the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
  Constitution

2
Withholding of evidence violates due process
"where the evidence is material either to guilt
or to punishment."

• The court held that withholding evidence violates
  due process "where the evidence is material
  either to guilt or to punishment" and the court
  determined that under Maryland state law the
  withheld evidence could not have exculpated the
  defendant but was material to the level of
  punishment he would be given.

3
Brady material consists of exculpatory or
impeaching information that is material to the
guilt or punishment of the defendant.

• The term comes from the U.S. Supreme Court case,
  Brady v. Maryland,1 in which the Supreme Court
  ruled that suppression by the prosecution of
  evidence favorable to a defendant who has
  requested it violates due process. Following
  Brady, the prosecutor must disclose evidence or
  information that would prove the innocence of the
  defendant. Evidence that would serve to reduce
  the defendant's sentence must also be disclosed
  by the prosecution.

4
BRADY MATERIAL

• The prosecutor must disclose an agreement not to
  prosecute a witness in exchange for the witness's
  testimony.2
• The prosecutor must disclose leniency (or
  preferential treatment) agreements made with
  witnesses in exchange for testimony.3
• The prosecutor must disclose exculpatory evidence
  known only to the police. This imposes a duty on
  the prosecutor to review the police's
  investigatory files and disclose anything that
  tends to prove the innocence of the defendant.4
  
• The prosecutor must disclose arrest photographs
  of the defendant when those photos do not match
  the victim's description

5
Forensic photography resulted from the
modernization of criminal justice systems and the
power of photographic realism.

• French photographer, Alphonse Bertillon was the
  first to realize that photographs were futile for
  identification if they were not standardized by
  using the same lighting, scale and angles

6
Among the more famous, and arguably the most
famous crime photographer, is Arthur Fellig,
better known as "Weegee."

• He was known for routinely arriving at crime
  scenes before other reporters, or often even
  before the police, The nickname is speculated to
  come from an alternate spelling of the word
  "Ouija," implying that Fellig had a supernatural
  force telling where the action was going to
  occur. His first exhibition was a solo
  exhibition, entitled, "Weegee Murder is My
  Business" and showed in 1941 at the Photo League
  in New York. The Museum of Modern Art purchased
  five of his photos and showed them in an exhibit
  called "Action Photography." Forensic photography
  had now transcended mere documentation. It was
  considered an art. Weegee did not consider his
  photos art, but many perceived them that way. He
  is a prime example of the different purposes of
  forensic photography. His photographs were
  intended as documentation and were viewed that
  way in the paper by many people, but were shown
  in museums and seen as art by many others. His
  first book was published in 1945 and was titled,
  Naked City

7
(No Transcript)