This chapter is about the pitfalls of video evidence, which can be misleading. Video evidence can supply important additional context and present other sides of the story. But it is no silver bullet to cure interpretive conflicts. The chapter illustrates the partiality of perceptions through several stories of how different sides interpret video evidence—and how cameras from different angles can tell very different stories. The increasing use of audiovisual evidence requires greater public understanding of the biases that can affect our interpretation of the images that we see. The chapter discusses persuasion effects and potential distortions caused by angle, framing, timing, perspective, and the filter of one’s own preconceived notions. Cameras also may tempt us to ignore the relevant standard on legal questions where the proper yardstick in constitutional criminal procedure is what an officer perceived in the field, often under stress, not what a machine can capture. Moreover footage often is captured from just one perspective—the officer's, in the case of police-worn body cameras. The resulting pooled dataset may be skewed and lead to biased algorithms and findings from advanced analytics. The chapter discusses solutions for these important limitations of video evidence.