On violation of Order of Protection (Contempt of Court) the defendent decides on trial. This despite video surveillance from 4 IR sensitive cameras showing purp in the act. Also a fifth camera indicating ultra closeup of defendent in vehicle.
Has anyone gone through this experience and can you provide me any advise that may benefit my case?

You have the video evidence and that is all...

Dependent who this xxx is represented, chances are good that they will question the authenticity of the video... and dependent who the manufacturer of your DVR is, your best bet is to obtain this manufacturer papers showing difficulty, if not impossibility, in altering video content... and present your case.

More important question for you is what is it that you want this case to produce for you? Do you want this person to go to jail (very unlikely) or do you want to impose a restitution for the crime imposed against you? Are you pursuing criminal case or civil case? Too many variables avail dependent what you are trying to gain...

Video authenticity I believe are assured by manufacturers GE & Sony. Video alteration on the other hand always concerned me though, I will have to do my home work regarding water marking and such.
What I seek is at least a 2 year 'Order of Protection' including third party harassment. As this is the forth 'Order of Protection' against the defendent. The ADA has no problem with what I seek in restitution and is looking forward to a trial with the evidence provided.

I've dealt with the DA's office here multiple times. They hardly ever get hit by the defense for video alteration. Originally they would confiscate the hard drive for chain of custody reasons. Now, they take what they call the "first copy" meaning the video is backed up on a cd or dvd. I've been called in to testify on the authenticity of the video but it never went any further than that. Shootings, stabbings, etc. A contempt of court will probably piss the Judge off enough to over rule any complaint by the defense anyway. Let the video speak for itself.

'First Copy' - thats exactly what the ADA did.
The difficulty involved in attaining a prosecutable image of somebody driving by at night in a vehicle is an intensive interative procedure. Having a combination of sufficient IR illumination, fast shutter, and proper dept of field using telephoto lens. But it was a great learning experience and so is the Trial issue.

I appreciate the advise offered, thanks.

You may be called upon just to guide the judge jury etc through the video footage. They may ask you to provide overview of your CCTV system and brief description of cameras

Be prepared and make sure you review the video again to refresh your memory. On a couple occassions the D.A. did not thoroughly review the video and you might be able to point something out. Also they may not be able to properly display and view video without your assistance!!

For some reason on the 2-3 occasions I have been involved in legal issues that included CCTV everyone asked when I saved video and more info about saving video.

In one situation the camera that would have provided the best view of the incident was out of service. The other side accused of "destructing video" and only choosing the video we wanted to put on CD. They did not count on us having all the proper documentation of the camera failure including emails, activity log entries, and invoices from our CCTV contractor.

One last thing.....know what type of compression the DVR uses and know the differences between JPEG2000, H-264, etc. A smart ass defense attorney will try to get you to stutter and look dumb if he can to attack credibility.

Thats one for the good guys. Defendent accepts offer of extended Order of protection (including third party harrassment) for 2 years. And a conviction of 'disorderly conduct'. Which I believe remains on his record indefinitely. This works out alot better than beating hell out of him. You just have to be patient.