or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue. Pa.R.E. 1004. If the originals are not available at trial in criminal cases, through no fault of the Commonwealth, secondary evidence is permissible. Fisher, supra; Binder on Pennsylvania Evidence § 10.04 at 622 (discussing burden of proof with respect to unavailability of evidence). As to the admissibility of “other evidence” of contents of writings, recordings, or photographs, Rule 1008 also provides: Rule 1008. Functions of court and jury When the admissibility of other evidence of writings, recordings, or photographs under these rules depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the question of whether the condition has been fulfilled is ordi (Pa.Super.2000), appeal denied, 566 Pa. 662, 782 A.2d 545 (2001) (<HOLDING>). But see Lewis, supra (reversing and remanding
holding that best interest of child need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence recognizing the right of a defendant to comment upon the failure of the state to produce evidence holding eyewitness testimony obviates need to produce videotape made simultaneously videotape evidence does not rise to level of best evidence when eyewitness testifies from personal knowledge holding any improper delegation did not rise to level of plain error holding that to be credible a petitioner must support his allegations of innocence with new rehable evidence  whether it be exculpatory scientific evidence trustworthy eyewitness accounts or critical physical evidence  that was not presented at trial