<much discussion cut for brevity, not for lack of interest> On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Tom Perrine wrote: > [Hey! Erin! Where are you?] > Okay, Tom, you include your local lawyer, I'll include mine ;-), who authored my favorite discussion of the use of computer data in court. Group, meet Professor Orin Kerr. Orin, we're having a little chat about using computer logs in court. > System logs are "hearsay" which is admitted under the "business > records exception". So there is at least a well--understood legal > methid to get them in. But, once you've got the logs in evidence, > THEN the fun begins. That's where each sides' expert witnesses > display dueling interpretations of what the logs actually mean. > http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/usamarch2001_4.htm "Computer Records and the Federal Rules of Evidence" in which Orin differentiates computer data consisting of stuff that humans composed that happens to be stored on computers, from computer data generated without human intervention (after the program was written). he discusses the whole hearsay argument; we've discussed it on the list before, and i'm a little too backed up at the moment to recount it. but the article is >>fabulous<< and i heartily recommend it to anyone who's interested in the case law regarding those annoying little bits of data that we all know and love. _______________________________________________ LogAnalysis mailing list LogAnalysisat_private http://lists.shmoo.com/mailman/listinfo/loganalysis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Dec 11 2002 - 23:09:51 PST