FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – At a stand-your-ground hearing on Tuesday, Broward County Judge Andrew Siegel experienced a unique approach to understanding a defense expert’s opinion: He used a virtual reality headset. It’s believed to be a historic moment in a Florida courtroom.
An artist designed an immersive experience using the Oculus Quest 2 VR headset to illustrate a defense expert’s opinion in the case of Southwest Ranches wedding venue owner Miguel Albisu.
Albisu is accused of waving a gun at guests at a reception in 2023 and was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
“This is when he pulls the gun out, when he is backed up against the bar,” defense expert Bill Engler testified.
Albisu has claimed self-defense.
Attorney Ken Padowitz said Albisu’s wife and son were attacked and a chair thrown by a DJ hit the party planner, injuring her wrist.
“They were able to get out, glass shattered everywhere, get out of this wedding facility, and wake up my client, Mike, who was sleeping and he was told what happened at his wedding facility,” Padowitz said. “Having all that information, he immediately directed his wife to call 911 and then needed to immediately, he believed, save his staff from injury or potentially death, save his building, his home, from people who were intoxicated at this wedding, and so he went in there with the goal of deescalating and having the party stop and everyone leave.”
Padowitz believes it’s the first time VR has been admitted to evidence in a Florida — or any American — courtroom.
“It may be the first time in the United States that virtual reality was admitted into a criminal hearing,” he said.
Padowitz was also responsible for another Florida first back in 1992 as a homicide prosecutor: He introduced the first computer animation into evidence.
“It became one of the first case laws in the United States upholding the use of computer animation in a criminal case. Since that time, we have evolved to this point where our abilities far exceed what we did in 1992,” Padowitz said. “So, what we are doing here today is not only did we show the judge a computer animation of what occurred prior to my client having to pull out that gun in self-defense for his life, but we also showed it in a virtual reality.”
The idea, Padowitz said, was to put the judge into his client’s shoes.
“We put headsets on the judge, the prosecutors and the witness and the judge was able to see from my client’s own eyes, from his own perspective, what he faced when he was surrounded by intoxicated partygoers,” he said. “They grabbed him, and he felt at that point in time he needed to pull out his weapon to defend his own life and his property.”
Opening Pandora’s box?: Court proceeding as new use case for VR
A growing body of research has shown that the human mind records a VR experience as a memory. This presents a host of questions legal scholars will likely explore, said legal analyst David Weinstein, when it comes to a judge or jury recording as a memory of one party’s view of a case.
A Cambridge University Press 2023 abstract explained that, “experiences that take place in virtual reality (VR) become part of users’ autobiographical memory. As memories can impact users’ self-perception, personal beliefs, and social interactions, story living in VR narratives can be used to manipulate memory and (mold) users’ self according to the preferences of the VR narrative creators.”
In 2018, researchers at Stanford University also found that virtual reality experiences may help people feel empathy.
“Experiences are what define us as humans, so it’s not surprising that an intense experience in VR is more impactful than imagining something,” said Jeremy Bailenson, a professor of communication and a co-author of the paper.”
In 2017 Google News Lab published the results of a study of how audiences experience VR.
In it, researchers note that “VR can create a powerful emotional connection between audiences and subjects,” adding that “the ways in which the medium engages audiences with dramatic imagery and conveys a sense of presence could produce emotional oversaturation or, worse, sensationalistic spectacle. The sense of authenticity leaves audiences vulnerable to traumatizing content or manipulation.”
Related:
The History of Forensic Animation in the Courtroom
A Case for Animation: A Study of the Use of Forensic Multimedia in the Courtroom
Weinstein weighed in on Tuesday.
“A trial has traditionally been the process where the lawyers recreate the case for a jury to consider,” he said. “This had been accomplished by introducing the testimony of witnesses and showing the jury physical evidence and testimony from experts interpreting that physical evidence.”
He said as trials evolved, attorneys introduced things like fingerprint analysis, ballistic reports and DNA evidence, “all with the goal of making the jurors feel like they were there as the events being litigated took place.”
“Putting aside the rules of evidence and decades of case law that govern how trials take place, by inserting virtual reality into the equation, will we be taking away a juror’s ability to figure it out by themselves and reach an independent conclusion?” Weinstein asked. “Will this virtual reality simulation replace that process and virtually eliminate the jurors from the decision about the verdict?”
It is expected that if this case does end up before a jury, the use of the defendant’s point-of-view virtual reality experience as evidence for jurors to view would be re-litigated at a pre-trial evidentiary hearing.
The stand-your-ground hearing, like a mini-trial before the judge, who is the fact-finder at this proceeding, is expected to run all week.
Padowitz added if additional witnesses remain, the court has said the proceeding will resume in February.
He added that if this case goes before a jury, he would also want the virtual reality videos created to be admitted into evidence.
“The judge has already allowed into evidence this virtual reality and this computer animation so it is now in evidence for this hearing,” said Padowitz. “Part of what we are asking the judge to do is allow us, if the judge ruled against us, and if we were to lose on appeal, and it went to jury trial, we are asking the judge to ask us to use this virtual realty and this computer animation before a jury and a jury trial.”