Panoscan logo


Panoscan Evidence Admitted in 4th District Federal Court Case

Panoscan imaging was accepted in the United States District Court District of Minnesota Federal case on September 21, 2011 in a high profile case: ADT Security Services Inc. vs Vicki Seliger Swenson .The excerpt from the court record shows:

[28] The Swensons seek permission to use a panoramic digital presentation constituting a virtual walk-through of the Lee home and the exterior home during opening and/or closing statements. The Swensons also seek to use a scaled model of the Lee home during trial, including during opening and/or closing statements. The Court has reviewed images of the scaled home and the material in the proposed presentation, and finds that these items will be useful to the jury in understanding what occurred on the night of the murders. With the caveats noted below, the Court will allow the use of the presentation, and the images included therein, as well as the scaled model. The Court will now address ADT's specific objections to this material.

[65] The Swensons' Motion in Limine No. 3 to Allow the Use of a Panoramic Digital Presentation [Docket No. 355] is GRANTED. At trial, if necessary, the Court may enter a limiting instruction regarding the image of Hawkinson's gun, instructing the jury that Hawkinson's fanny pack was not open at the time of the murders. (See Barton Aff., Ex. D, at 5.) Any remaining objections regarding the Swensons' photographs of the back staircase or the placement of the glass breakage detector in photographs will be addressed at trial.

Although the case was settled out of court the case record clearly shows the Panoscan imaging was admitted and approved for presentation in the Federal case. Here are some news articles referencing the story:



Star Tribune


Panoscan Evidence Admitted in The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee at Nashville

Panoscan imaging was accepted in the case of State of Tennessee vs. Coy J. Cotham This excerpt from the court record shows:

Officer Johnny Lawrence of the MNPD Technical Investigations Division testified that he created a Panoscan2 image of the crime scene, which was admitted as an exhibit. He described the appearance of the garage area and said it appeared some activity had occurred near the front of the victim’s vehicle.

2 The witness defined the Panoscan as “a camera that sits on a tripod that will take multiple pictures 400-degrees, once that is done, we use software to put that together, so you’re actually like you’re standing inside of this photograph and this photograph can spin around, it’s like you’re inside . . . the actual scene.”