Mar. 15, 2018), ruled that social
media evidence authentication requires, at a minimum:
Not exact matches
For a deeper dive into the operation and interplay of these rules, I recommend both the 2013 journal article from Judge Grimm linked above («
Authentication of Social
Media Evidence») and the more recent best practices guide he co-authored for the Rules Advisory Committee, «Best Practices for Authenticating Digital
Evidence» (available starting on page 275 of the materials from the October 2016 meeting of the Advisory Committee on Rules of
Evidence).
In the next part of this series, «
Authentication and Admissibility of Social Media Evidence,» we will begin our discussion of the issues associated with authentication and admission of social media material
Authentication and Admissibility of Social
Media Evidence,» we will begin our discussion of the issues associated with authentication and admission of social media materials as evid
Media Evidence,» we will begin our discussion of the issues associated with authentication and admission of social media materials as e
Evidence,» we will begin our discussion of the issues associated with
authentication and admission of social media material
authentication and admission of social
media materials as evid
media materials as
evidenceevidence.
Authors Gerald Chan (defence) and Susan Magotiaux (crown) address current and emerging challenges, and clarify the nuances of
authentication, admissibility, social
media evidence, and the search and seizure of electronic devices.
X1 also just released their whitepaper on the topic: «Overcoming Potential Legal Challenges to the
Authentication of Social
Media Evidence for eDiscovery.»