Again, the driving is not the evidence. You keep trying to apply the hearsay rule to the driving. There is no way to submit driving as evidence. The evidence is the video. It is a statement about the driving, being used to prove the accused behavior.
It does make a difference, though. The witness can be cross examined. He can be impeached. The video can’t be. It’s more analogous to a witness who says, “This other guy who said he saw the accident told me he saw this.”
You are correct on why video is admitted. What I’m saying is that those are exceptions. It is hearsay, but it’s allowed in because of its reliability. That is very soon going to be highly suspect. As soon as AI and deep faked videos get good enough that it becomes really difficult to identify them as fake, then the reliability of all video evidence becomes suspect.
