On Thursday, August 14, 2003, at 02:37 PM, Bob Bish wrote:
> This is utterly ridiculous. I'm not an attorney, but a law degree
> isn't necessary to see the obvious holes in this so-called "logic".
> For one, e-mail could not possibly hold up as evidence in a court
> of law. It is far too easy to fake.
Excuse me? E-mail is introduced as evidence in zillions of cases,
civil and criminal, all over the country every day. Like other types
of documents, it can be faked, and just like those other documents, it
can be authenticated by a number of methods.
A company I consult for is involved with the authentication and
analysis of e-mail and other messaging for litigation support. It's a
multi-million dollar business, and as more communications moves from
paper to electronic messaging, it's getting bigger fast.
I tend to agree that the liability proposition alluded to is somewhat
weak, but it's not nonexistent, and certainly not by reason of the
inadmissibility of e-mail as evidence.
--
Michael C. Berch
mcb@postmodern.com / mcb@greatcircle.com
References:
|
|
