In Attempting to Have Her Embezzlement Conviction Reversed, in McHenry

In attempting to have her embezzlement conviction reversed, in McHenry v. State of Indiana, the defendant argued that the use of a videotape recording system that took moving pictures of her activities in the bank as a teller should not have been used against her. She believed that the prosecution failed to offer a proper authentication of the bank videotape and that there had been no proof that the videotape was a business record. In order to admit a bank videotape of a crime as photographs of real evidence:

A) the prosecution must show that the videotaping system was working properly on the day in question and that the videotaping activity was a regularly conducted business practice.
B) at least one government witnesses must be able to identify the defendant as the perpetrator from looking at a videotape and testify concerning the defendant's identity.
C) the government need only have an original copy of the videotape, and the quality of the copy goes to the weight rather than its admissibility.
D) the prosecutor does not have to prove the reliability of the system or that it was working properly on the day in question, only that the videotaping was often done as part of the bank's routine.