Are Text Messages Inadmissible in Civil Court?
People often assume that text messages sent to them are private and cannot be used against them in court. Unfortunately, this is not always the case.
Police authorities often obtain warrants to search a person’s phone and use its contents as evidence in criminal trials. Legal professionals also have access to text messages and can present them as evidence during civil litigation.
Authentication
In today’s digital world, where emails, texts and social media posts are frequently sought as evidence in civil court cases, it can be challenging for practitioners to determine how to authenticate this type of digital information. This challenge may be especially daunting for novice attorneys who lack experience introducing this type of evidence into a trial setting.
Civil court authentication standards are the same as criminal law’s: the party providing evidence must demonstrate that an item is indeed what it claims to be. This means confirming its authenticity according to FRE 901(a).
Typically, the authenticity of digital information can be verified through one of several methods. The most popular is traditional user ID and password authentication; however, this method is vulnerable to phishing attacks and key loggers, so it may not be suitable for all systems.
Other methods involve multifactor authentication, which involves using more than just a username and password to authenticate users. This may involve the use of biometric factors like fingerprints or voiceprints as well. Furthermore, many modern applications utilize public key encryption as an extra layer of protection to guarantee that digital evidence isn’t stolen or compromised.
Another example of authentication is visual comparison between an object and another. This can be done through personal knowledge of both objects being compared, which can be a cost-effective and reliable method for authenticating electronic machine-generated evidence – though this method isn’t always available everywhere.
Alternative, some courts will permit a forensic technician to testify to the physical characteristics of an item. This is particularly useful in determining whether something is real or fake.
In civil court, authentication is critical to prevent unauthorized users from accessing confidential data. This can be especially advantageous when someone is accused of stealing or leaking sensitive information such as banking details or credit card numbers.
Context
Context is a major factor in civil court, and lawyers make decisions based on the context surrounding an issue. Lawyers must take into account factors like client financial status, legal issues and time constraints before making their decision.
Text messages have become a ubiquitous form of communication, and can have an enormous effect on court proceedings. For instance, terse and provocative messages about child custody or visitation schedules between couples could potentially damage one’s reputation if taken out of context.
Text messages must adhere to certain rules just like any other form of evidence, including relevance and probative value versus prejudicial significance and non-hearsay status.
The court must be certain the message sent via text message is authentic. To demonstrate its authenticity, the sender of the text message can testify about its contents; alternatively, other evidence that may provide some clues as to its origin may also be considered by the court.
One of the primary issues with text messages as evidence is their potential for fabrication or alteration, leading to mislead the jury. While this is not an issue in criminal proceedings, it can present significant problems in civil law cases.
It is essential to remember that text messages are not automatically considered evidence in cases involving family law. In certain situations, such as divorces and custody battles, parties may need to present specific evidence in order to prevail in their legal battles.
The most frequent objection to text messages as evidence is that they are hearsay, which refers to statements made outside of court and therefore inadmissible in courtrooms. While this may be true in some instances, there are numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule which apply to texts messages as well. These include confessions, admissions against interest, family history records, public records, business records and even texts intended for medical or physical conditions that already existed at the time of transmission.
Hearsay
Hearsay is an admissible form of evidence in civil court that attorneys often rely on to assist their clients. Unfortunately, hearsay can also be unreliable and thus inadmissible.
Hearsay can be defined as any representation of fact that does not originate from the personal knowledge or credibility of the witness. Unlike actual witnesses, hearsay statements are not documented or written down and therefore cannot be independently verified in court.
It is essential to be aware that hearsay can be admissible in civil courts, provided it meets certain criteria. Furthermore, knowing how to discern whether a statement is hearsay or not requires some expertise.
One common way a statement can be deemed hearsay is when it originates from an opposing party. While this approach can be beneficial in uncovering information that may be pertinent to your case, it also poses potential legal complications.
Another example of hearsay is information contained in a police report. Especially, this can be relevant to criminal cases where statements contained within can be admitted as evidence if they meet certain criteria.
If you are going to testify in court, it is essential that your attorney be informed about any out-of-court statements you make. Doing this allows the lawyer to assess whether the statement meets an exception to the hearsay rule.
Examples of exceptions to this rule include dying declarations and emotional outbursts. These statements may be admissible in certain circumstances if the speaker was unaware of their imminent death or was overcome with emotion at the time.
It is essential to remember that hearsay can only be admissible if it serves to verify the truth of what you say. For instance, if a prosecutor offers someone’s statement about seeing when they were shot in order to establish that the defendant is guilty of shooting a police officer, that would constitute hearsay evidence.
Inadmissibility
Just as with other evidence, defendants and their lawyer always have the right to object to any text messages introduced into evidence.
Before a text message can be admissible in court, it must be relevant (tending to prove or disprove a material fact in the case) and it must not violate other rules of evidence, including hearsay. Authenticating the message may be enough but most likely facing opposition will come from a hearsay objection.
Courts are increasingly being asked to make evidentiary rulings as technology progresses. To provide more efficient legal services, courts are now being asked to rule on evidence such as text messages which could significantly influence the outcome of your case.
Second, text messages sent via civil court can be admissible if the state can verify they were written by the individual claimed to have sent them. Furthermore, the State must prove that the text message wasn’t altered in any way and wasn’t sent from a fraudulent or third-party source.
In another case, a trial court abused its discretion in admitting 12 text messages in a drug case because the State failed to present sufficient evidence confirming who sent them. Without verification that these messages had actually been sent by the defendant and came from an authentic email address, these texts could not have been admitted into evidence.
The text messages at issue were sent from a personal phone, and the State had not proven that the defendant was its primary user. The Supreme Court of Nevada held that in order for these texts to be admissible into evidence, the State must first prove to the trial court that defendant had access to her phone for texting purposes.
Other grounds for inadmissibility may include practicing polygamy, being an international child abductor or voting unlawfully. Individuals who are inadmissible due to a criminal conviction can seek waiver of this restriction by applying for either a visa, green card or change of status with the United States government.