From Game Rooms to Courtrooms: How Virtual Reality (VR) Is Changing the Legal Landscape

“Jury Duty” is a courtroom spoof-comedy reality show where the only victim is Ronald Gladden, who thinks he’s going to be a juror. Ronald is “picked” as a juror in a civil trial, except he is the only one who isn’t in on the theme of the show. The judge, counsel, fellow jurors, and witnesses are all actors, but Ronald is not. In one scene, the competent plaintiff’s counsel presents a kind of virtual reality reenactment of the scene which is the subject of the civil litigation, and it truly impresses the jurors. The bumbling counsel for the defense does the same, except his virtual man is pixelated and collapses into the floor. The jurors and judge sit in puzzlement, wondering what point they’re supposed to get from this poorly constructed video portrayal. It causes confusion and, for the audience, is absolutely hilarious.[1]

The benefits of visual design in the courtroom cannot be understated. Visual aids like timelines, illustrative comparisons, video evidence, and graphs can help judges and juries comprehend an argument, demonstrate how things work, or illustrate an important point. When done poorly, however, it can have the opposite effect, creating confusion and raising questions of counsel competence and good judgment. Virtual Reality (VR) is one visual aid that is fairly underused in the judicial system but has the potential to make a meaningful impact in the courtroom when done right.

VR can take people anywhere in the world, even into fantasy worlds, and transform them into anything. VR is most commonly seen in video games. A few years ago, VR was only seen in gaming rooms across the country – I once played a Ghostbusters-themed VR game complete with proton packs and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man and Gozer the Gozerian – and it’s now part of home gaming systems. In a consumer survey, KPMG estimated that of those surveyed, 30% owned a VR headset.[2] The greater availability of VR has led to greater adoption in mainstream society, which is positive for the future adoption of VR in legal practice and the courtroom.

Dan Riley, Founder and CEO of Spearhead Interactive recently presented at the Legal Design Summit in Helsinki, speaking about the use of VR in the courtroom.[3] Dan’s presentation centered around a UK-based case that involved Spearhead and led to the spin-out and launch of a new legal-tech start-up, Resol-VR.[4] Among its various specialties delivering immersive experiences across a range of technologies and platforms, Resol-VR creates interactive 3D visualizations, including the use of VR for presentation in the courtroom. A few years ago, Resol-VR was retained to collaborate with forensic and accident investigators, legal professionals, and insurance specialists to develop a VR reenactment of a fatal traffic accident. Here are the facts of the case in brief:

• It is a sunny day on a Scottish country road. There is a rock wall along one side of the road and trees along the other. Ahead, on the same side as the trees, is a substantial ballast driveway (a mix of sand, other materials, and concrete).
• An articulated lorry with a sole driver is carrying a load of aviation fuel (19,000 litres/4,200 gallons) on a routine trip from the refinery to the airport (semi-trailer truck).
• A local grocery delivery van with a sole driver is ahead, making deliveries along the road (grocery van).
• The grocery van turns into the wrong driveway by accident. Realizing this error, the grocery van turns back on the main road and slows down looking for the right delivery address.
• Faced with a slow-moving vehicle ahead, the semi-trailer truck decides to overtake the grocery van. The grocery van makes a sudden turn in front of the semi-trailer truck.
• There is a minor collision between the two vehicles; the grocery van driver is not injured.
• The semi-trailer truck veers into a ditch, driving into hedging before colliding with the ballast driveway; the semi-trailer truck driver is killed.
• The semi-trailer truck cargo is punctured by a tree branch causing aviation fuel spillage into a garden and watercourse.
• A criminal action commenced, concluding with a ‘not-proven’ verdict against the grocery van driver.
• Civil litigation ensues involving multiple parties.^[5]

Resol-VR was engaged in the civil litigation to create a VR model of the accident scene. But how?

Using witness statements and documentation exchanged by the parties, including weather reports, driving conditions, accident reports, speed of the vehicles, size/makes and models of the vehicles, forensic and tachograph data, cloud data for the 3D scene, data from the UK’s National Meteorological Service, and other additional data, Resol-VR recreated the accident as it most likely happened. Facts and data went into the VR model.

Resol-VR’s model was so successful that after critical evaluation by both counsel, it withstood any major flaws and was accepted by all parties as a likely rendition of the events. This ultimately led to a settlement and, hopefully, some measure of closure for the family of the victim.

Resol-VR was engaged in the matter after litigation had been ongoing for over three years and costs exceeded $7,000,000 (GBP). Following submission of Resol-VR’s model, the matter settled in just two weeks and shortly thereafter, a companion criminal matter also concluded. The judge for the civil matter noted that had this matter gone to trial, he would have been receptive to having the VR visualization in the courtroom.

While it is utterly tragic to participate as a ‘viewer’ in the VR world, seeing what each driver saw just prior to the accident, this VR model helps us understand the value and impact of integrating the law, technology, and visual elements.

Whether in the civil or criminal context, the general test when using demonstrative evidence (at least in Canada), is whether the evidence is relevant, probative, increases understanding, and whether it protects the right to a fair trial.[6] Demonstrative evidence should not:

• Lead to irrational conclusions
• Be a distraction
• Be confusing
• Cause prejudicial effect

Essentially, the value of the demonstrative evidence must be worth the costs to the court in terms of wasted court time as a result of confusion.[7]

If counsel decides to use a similar VR model in their action, it is important to understand that the demonstrative aid should be factual in nature and not embellished. Counsel should have a true and practical understanding of how the demonstrative aid “came to be”. A true understanding means that counsel understands what underlying software was used and how it operates, and what data and information went into creating the VR model. By anticipating questions by opposing counsel on how the demonstrative aid was developed, counsel will be in a better position to defend the relevance and non-prejudicial nature of the demonstrative evidence. The goal of any demonstrative aid should be that it is factual in nature and ensure that the maker has not taken ‘artistic’ liberties. Hopefully, when the VR model is developed using facts and data, those facts swing in counsel’s favour.

What can we learn from Dan’s story and the VR model? It seems obvious. Why explain what happened and how it happened when you can visually show how it happened? That’s the beauty of combining the law with design. Being able to tell a visually compelling, factually accurate story, with technology that allows all parties to quite literally step into the shoes of the parties involved in the litigation and see how the events likely occurred. When all sides understand the facts, the matter is more likely to resolve. However, it is important to keep in mind that not all demonstrative evidence, or VR models, in Dan’s case, are created alike, and a poor visual representation can make for some funny sketch comedy, but not fun reality.

_____________________

[1] Jury Duty: Animated From Defense (Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0MUMGmEgrI). Adapted from “Jury Duty” (Amazon Prime, 2023).

[2] “The metaverse is open for business: Is your company ready?” (KPMG, 2022, Online: https://kpmg.com/us/en/articles/2022/metaverse-open-for-business.html (2022)).

[3] Dan Riley, “Enhancing Forensic Accident Investigation with Immersive Visualization: A Case Study” (Speaker: Legal Design Summit, 2023).

[4] Spearhead Interactive Limited, (Online: https://www.spearheadinteractive.com/).

[5] For case study, see: “Editorial – Spearhead Interactive – Is VR the Future of the Courtroom” (Lawyers Monthly, 2016, Online: https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2016/12/editorial-spearhead-interactive-is-vr-the-future-of-the-courtroom/)

[6] R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 9 (Online: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1131/index.do).

[7] Ibid.