Barisone Trial Starting Monday, 3/28

[endlessclimb]

@Jealoushe

This is the issue holding back the case of Abby and Libby from Delhi IN currently

Delphi.

[Scaramouch]

Has it been discussed how the ground level apartment in the farmhouse became “unlivable” between 2018 and 2019?

[Angela_Freda]

Burst pipe

[Jealoushe]

@soloudinhere

In the case that someone is posting from a name associated with you, in a style that matches posts known to yourself or others as being authored by you, on an account that posts photos that clearly depict you as a representation that you are the person behind the account - if someone saw you logged in and posting on that account at any time - all of these things can be in the totality of the circumstances used to show that a post is likely to have been authored by you. Similarly can also be used to introduce that a post may NOT have been authored by you.

Ultimately it is the JURY who rules on authenticity and whether they consider a piece as authentic or not.

This isn’t correct. They have to at least match IPs to the users address, and cell phone pings. Along with style etc.

The jury, doesn’t get to see evidence that they cant prove is involved.

Ask me how I know?

[LexInVA]

Water pipe burst, flooding water throughout the structure.

[soloudinhere]

@Scaramouch

Has it been discussed how the ground level apartment in the farmhouse became “unlivable” between 2018 and 2019?

According to JH, there was a flooding incident with significant water damage.

[Jealoushe]

@Scaramouch

Has it been discussed how the ground level apartment in the farmhouse became “unlivable” between 2018 and 2019?

Flooding

[TwiSedai]

Oh now she’s saying she only owns one gun.

[Jealoushe]

Some good info here:

Admissibility of Social Media Evidence: Guidance for Court Cases - Bosco...

How Do You Authenticate Social Media Evidence?

Your best chance at being able to use social media evidence in court is enlisting a team of professional social media investigators to procure appropriate data, ensure chain of custody, and maintain the integrity of electronic information.

In general, the basis of establishing social media evidence’s authenticity includes three main principles:

• Proof of authorship or account ownership. This is circumstantial evidence that requires a thorough record of supporting documents or witnesses. What we mean is: one Facebook profile page does not prove that a certain person is responsible for the content of that account. Instead, you’ll need to have evidence such as:

1. 1. Metadata and digital signatures as established in FRE 902(14).
2. Witness accounts that indicate a person is indeed the owner and author of certain posts. For instance, a witness could testify that a message from a certain account contained private information that only the defendant would know, or acknowledge consistent writing styles across various communications.
3. Usernames or profile photos used consistently across multiple social media platforms that are positively associated with a particular person.

Take Pennsylvania Superior Court case Commonwealth v. Mangel. Facebook posts created by a user with the same name, location, and high school as the defendant were introduced as incriminating evidence. The court determined that social media evidence was not admissible and that those factors did not sufficiently prove authorship by the defendant. This case highlights how forensic preservation of electronic data, including recording back-end metadata, can be so crucial to your case’s success.

• Forensic preservation. As established above, the way you obtain and store electronic information matters. Full metadata should be preserved and it should undergo no alterations or changes, and all transcriptions or transfer of information must be properly documented. It is this chain of custody that allows relevant electronic data from social media platforms to be discoverable. You may also compel social media platforms to provide certain data (such as account information or IP addresses) that can further substantiate the time, location, or computer from which a post was made.
• Establishing reliability. The way in which a platform ensures the secure collection and storage of personal information can support authentication. If the company uses measures such as two-factor authentication, “verified” public accounts, and email confirmations, this can be a boost to your claim that the social media evidence you’ve gathered is reliably associated with a particular person.

The bottom line: over-authenticate as much as possible when it comes to social media . Before heading to court, research whether the presiding judge has heard social media cases in the past and what standard the evidence was held to in those instances. Remember that you may need a warrant/court order to legally obtain certain private information.

[Angela_Freda]

Right? Only one gun? What???

[eggbutt]

Total BS! Judges judge the ride at the time in their ring, not what barn they are at.

[hut-ho78]

@eggbutt

Total BS! Judges judge the ride at the time in their ring, not what barn they are at.

In theory, yes. In reality, breed bias, BNT bias, etc. is discussed often, in these forums and others.

[eggbutt]

He asked how many guns she has…he didn’t specify WHEN. She may have ditched all the others posted on FB.

[supernatural]

Is it too early for popcorn and wine??? Asking for a friend…

[Angela_Freda]

2015-16 she bought the Walther PPK

[soloudinhere]

Reposting to save time. You have excerpted something that supports your statement however the case law is much more extensive than you’ve let on. You are focusing on authentication, of which you have only posted one piece from a lawyer’s blog. There is another whole option for authentication:

Fed 904: the authentication requirement is satisfied when a party demonstrates that the circumstantial evidence in conjunction with the “[a]ppearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of” the evidence are sufficient to prove that the proffered item is what it is purported to be.

United States v. Lewisby : incriminating posts on social networking website are properly authenticated by characteristics
United States v. Browne Same for Facebook chats
United States v. Barnes Same for text messages
United States v. Siddiqui Same for emails

The jury is who determines whether an item is authentic or not. If the introducing party feels that the circumstances are not enough to authenticate the item, that is their decision not to introduce it. The judge can exclude it on a hearsay basis, but if they do not, proffered authentication is sufficient if there is testimony that the contents of the item is consistent with (there’s that phrase again) known posts or content.

In this case, she has admitted in the civil record that the accounts are hers.

[Angela_Freda]

JH had a drinking problem… isn’t hearsay?

[Jealoushe]

@soloudinhere

Reposting to save time. You have excerpted something that supports your statement however the case law is much more extensive than you’ve let on. You are focusing on authentication, of which you have only posted one piece from a lawyer’s blog. There is another whole option for authentication:

It’s all related… but bottom line is it isn’t used if it can’t be authenticated and its not easy to authenticate as you imply.

Otherwise, wouldn’t we be seeing it all now in this trial? I’m not sure why you think you are proving me wrong but enjoy the feeling you’re apparently getting from it

[SpicyPRE]

I found that comment to be out of line.

[Rel6]

No - its not an out of court statement (and statements by him are admissible anyway as an opposing party). But it is her opinion, and I’m surprised it did not get objected to on those grounds.

ETA: I thought she was saying MB had a drinking problem, so part of what I said isn’t correct in reference to JH. But still not hearsay.