emrob62 Loc: NEPA

Was just wondering, since I was tempted yesterday, if anybody has ever stopped uninvited to photograph an accident scene. Passed a pretty nasty one on my home last night, with car parts spread out kind of far. Didn't appear to be any serious injuries, thanks God. The police were there and none of the vehicles had yet been moved. Was thinking I could stop and offer photo evidence for the insurance follow-up, but was uncertain as to the possible involvement that would lead to later.
Had my camera with me (which is a rarity), but also my son who I had just picked up from track practice.
Just looking for some thoughts on the idea since I personnaly feel it could be a benefit to the people involved (or at least one of them) but also a possible downside to the at fault person.
Thanks for the feedback on this.

rocco_7155 Loc: Connecticut/Louisiana

Many personal injury lawyers are now dispensing smart phone apps with step by step checklists and 'folders' for what to do if you have an accident or are injured on the job, etc. including a folder for photos. Outside of having to testify that you took the photos and didnt alter them electronically to show a chain of evidence there isnt much downside to you. Sometimes the photos themselves ( water on a floor, hazard clearly visible) even prove the case for settlement without a trial.

steve Loc: Iowa

Good response Rocco.

Old Timer Loc: Greenfield, In.

If you take a picture of a accident or fire or any thing that your insurance co. could use, do not crop it. It is considered a alter photo and can keep it from getting used. I am not technical enough to under stand all of it, but they can review the exif files to determine that it has been altered.

emrob62 Loc: NEPA

Thanks guys. I'm not sure how often the opportunity would present itself, but just wondering if there were more cons than pros to it. Actually wish I had my camera last week. There was an accident involving an SUV and a trash truck. The SUV rear ended the truck at a traffic light and the hood was wedged under the rear of the trash truck. No way it was getting out without further damage, and it just looked kind funny the way it was positioned

rocco_7155 Loc: Connecticut/Louisiana

I know in Louisiana, the State Insurance Commission encourages taking photos because faked accidents and fraud have become such a drain due to the economy.
Also, my brother works in grocery for big chains, and "slip and falls" are a huge loss leader for them. They welcome photo evidence with time and date stamps.
So, there are lots of uses for immediate visual evidence besides giving them to the "plaintiff's" attorney!

emrob62 Loc: NEPA

Thanks for the extra info Rocco. I'm sure there a ton of reasons for people to want some photo proof for or against any claims being made.

johnr9999 Loc: Carlton, OR

During my years as an EMT I hated it when people would interfere with my work by trying to jam cameras in victims faces. I would make sure I had plenty of blood on my hands and then push them out of the way. I considered these people inconsiderate vultures. You have to understand that this is from someone that has loved photography long before getting involved in medicine.

vicspics Loc: Pennsylvania

For the last 20 years I have worked as a court stenographer and have never had photographic evidence presented at a deposition or hearing that was taken by a passerby. Personally, I would assist as a good Samaritan, but I don't think I would get involved, without someone asking, with picture taking. If the accident is bad enough, the police call in investigators to take photos. That's why it takes forever to clear the roads at times. If it is an accident that isn't that critical, it still could end up in a lawsuit (probably would): so be.certain that your schedule would allow for down-the-road time off to testify. They couldn't just accept those photos without a deposition and then court testifying if it goes that far. A really bad accident, they're not going to allow it. A less critical one, I, personally, wouldn't get in the way. I say this too having been myself in a very severe car accident eight months ago. I'm still out of work, have had surgeries. The other lady was in ICU six months. The police brought investigators to the scene to take photos.. I want to see them but dread it at the same time. I know Rocco says Louisiana encourages picture taking. I'm not sure about PA.

rayford2 Loc: New Bethlehem, PA

That's a good question.
On one hand it might be your civic duty to provide a photograph you've taken, but on the other hand there are plenty of lawyers that will try to discredit your evidence based on your reputation, skill and a host of other closet skeletons you might have.
Time and lawyer humiliation turns many people off when it comes to witnessing something.

penguinpete

I was almost hit by a motorist (fortunately I changed my mind about a lane change just before she appeared), but she rear-ended someone about a half block ahead of me. After driving clear of the accident scene I parked and took pictures of the accident scene (after helping the driver exit through the passenger window - both doors were wedged shut). I took pictures of the scene (until the EMTs showed up and asked me to stop) and obtained his email address. Later that evening I uploaded the pix from the camera and sent them to him as attachments. I have not had any repercussions from this.

-- Pete

Cappy Loc: Wildwood, NJ

This is a GREAT question, one that I never thoght of.
As a photojournalist I have taken pictures of several car accidents that have been put in local papers. Have never had an insurance company contact me.

Has anyone ever had an insurance company contact them??
Do they purchase your photos??
If going to court do you get paid??
If the answers are no, then in the future after sending them to the papers, I will DELETE them.

Wabbit Loc: Arizona Desert

You're treading on thin ice. Depending on the officers present you could have a problem. For the most part cops do not like to be photographed. That's where a articulating screen comes in very handy. You probably have more cooperation with law enforcement if you're involved with the incident vs a passer by.

My son was in a car accident last year and my pictures of the accident scene came in very, handy.

BTW the cops didn't like my camera. They didn't say anything but I was getting dirty looks.

The police accident report failed to describe the intersection accurately.

My pictures said a thousand words. And get this, the teacher was driving a rented car because she had a car accident two weeks prior.

Although this is normally a busy street there were no other cars on the road at the time. My pictures of the crash scene with out any doubt proved the path of both vehicles. The teacher was at 100% fault.

rocco_7155 Loc: Connecticut/Louisiana

Short answer is
Yes, been contacted (once a "cold" call, once through a victim who knew I took photos),
Yes, they can compensate expenses, which you have to divulge if questioned ("Yes. They reimbursed my expenses for coming here today.") But, they usually (state specific) arent allowed to ask how much.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Nope...no thin ice here.

Last I checked this is America and the first amendment still applies.

It's not illegal to take photos of accidents, accident personnel or vehicles or even ...gasp....Police officers!

they may not like it but it's legal no matter what they tell you.


No thin ice here.