Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Computer Forensics Docket Sheet
Court Finds 'Cut-and-Paste' Chat Room
Transcript Inadmissible Evidence
In a criminal case, the defendant filed a motion in limine to exclude evidence of chat-room conversations. At the conclusion of each chat-room session, an undercover police officer conducting the chat-room conversation would cut and paste the entire conversation into a Word document for later review. A computer forensics expert, however, testified that this cut-and-paste method created several errors and that several portions of the defendant's conversations were omitted. The defendant argued that the omitted portions of the transcript contained evidence relating directly to his intent and that the cut-and-pasted transcript should not be admitted as evidence without the omitted portions. The court found that the cut-and-paste document was not admissible evidence at trial because it was not authentic under the Federal Rules of Evidence ('FRE'). The government did not prove the proper foundation to show that the cut-and-paste transcript was a trustworthy source of evidence. The court also found that the transcript was not the 'best evidence' as required by the FRE. Although original duplicate documents might be admitted as evidence in lieu of original documents, they still must be an accurate reflection of the original's content. The court found that the cut-and-paste document offered by the government could not be proven to be an accurate reflection of the original chat-room discussions. United States v. Jackson, 2007 WL 1381772 (D. Neb. May 8, 2007).
Computer Forensics Docket Sheet were written by Michele C.S. Lange, a staff attorney with Kroll Ontrack, with the assistance of staff attorney Joni Heikes. Lange has published numerous articles and speaks regularly on the topics of electronic discovery, computer forensics and technology's role in the law. Lange is a member of e-Discovery Law & Strategy's Board of Editors. Reach her at [email protected].
Court Finds 'Cut-and-Paste' Chat Room
Transcript Inadmissible Evidence
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?