TSL.P Labs Bonus: Google AI Discussion: Everyday Tech, Extraordinary Evidence: Smartphones, Dash Cams, and Wearables as Silent Witnesses in Your Cases ⚖️📱

/ The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page/

Join us for an AI-powered deep dive into the ethical challenges facing legal professionals in the age of generative AI. 🤖 In this Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page Labs episode, our Google AI hosts unpack our January 26, 2026, editorial and discuss how everyday devices—smartphones, dash cams, wearables, and connected cars—are becoming “silent witnesses” that can make or break your next case, while walking carefully through ABA Model Rules on competence, candor, privacy, and preservation of digital evidence.

In our conversation, we cover the following:

  • 00:00 – Welcome to The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page Labs Initiative and this week’s “Everyday Tech, Extraordinary Evidence” AI roundtable 🧪

  • 00:30 – Why classic “surprise witness” courtroom drama is giving way to always-on digital witnesses 🎭

  • 01:15 – Introducing the concept of smartphones, dash cams, and wearables as objective “silent witnesses” in litigation 📱

  • 02:00 – Overview of Michael D.J. Eisenberg’s editorial “Everyday Tech, Extraordinary Evidence” and his mission to bridge tech and courtroom practice 📰[

  • 03:00 – Case study setup: the Alex Preddy shooting in Minneapolis and the clash between official reports and digital evidence ⚖️

  • 04:00 – How bystander smartphone video reframed the legal narrative in the Preddy matter and dismantled “brandished a weapon” claims 🎥

  • 05:00 – From “pressing play” to full video synchronization: building a unified timeline from multiple cameras to audit police reports 🧩06:00 – Using frame-by-frame analysis to test loaded terms like “lunging,” “aggressive resistance,” and “brandishing” against what the pixels actually show 🔍

  • 07:00 – Moving beyond what we see: introducing “quiet evidence” such as GPS logs, telemetry, and sensor data as litigation tools 📡

  • 08:00 – GPS data for location, duration, and speed: turning “he was charging” into a measurable movement profile in protest and road-rage cases 🚶‍♂️🚗

  • 09:00 – Layering GPS from phones with vehicle telematics to create a multi-source reconstruction that is hard to impeach in court 📊

  • 10:00 – Dash cams as 360-degree witnesses: solving blind spots of human perception and single-angle video 🛞

  • 11:00 – Why exterior audio from dash cams—shouts, commands, crowd noise—can be crucial to proving state of mind and mens rea 🔊

  • 12:00 – Wearables as a body-wide sensor network: heart rate, sleep, and step count as quantitative proof of pain, fear, and trauma ⌚

  • 13:00 – Using longitudinal wearable data to support claims of emotional distress or sleep disruption in personal injury and civil-rights litigation 😴

  • 14:00 – Heart-rate spikes and movement logs at the moment of an encounter as corroboration of fear or immobility in use-of-force matters

  • 15:00 – Why none of this evidence exists in your case file unless you know to ask for it at intake 🗂️

  • 16:00 – Updating intake: adding questions about smartwatches, location services, doorbell cameras, dash cams, and connected cars to your client questionnaires 📝

  • 17:00 – Data preservation as an emergency task: deletion cycles, cloud overwrites, and using TROs to stop digital spoliation 🚨

  • 18:00 – Turning raw logs into compelling visuals: maps, synced clips, and timelines that juries can understand without sacrificing accuracy 🗺️

  • 19:00 – Ethics spotlight: ABA Model Rule 1.1 competence and Comment 8—why “I’m not a tech person” is now an ethical problem, not an excuse 📚

  • 20:00 – Candor to the tribunal and the line between strong advocacy and fraud when editing or excerpting digital evidence ⚠️

  • 21:00 – Respecting third-party privacy under Rule 4.4: when you must blur faces, redact audio, or limit collateral exposure of bystanders 🧩

  • 22:00 – Advising clients not to delete texts, videos, or logs and explaining spoliation risks under Rule 3.4 ⚖️

  • 23:00 – The uranium analogy: digital tools as powerful but dangerous if used without adequate ethical “containment” ☢️

  • 24:00 – Philosophical closing: will juries someday trust heart-rate logs more than tears on the witness stand, and what does that mean for human testimony? 🤔

  • 25:00 – Closing remarks and invitation to explore the full editorial, show notes, and resources on The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page 🌐

If you enjoyed this episode, please like, comment, subscribe, and share!