Email Authentication

U.S. v. Siddiqui (11th Cir. 2000) 235 F.3d 1318.

E-mails were introduced into evidence over defendant hearsay and improper authentication objections. Court analyzed the authentication issues under traditional evidentiary standards. (FRE 901(a) and 901(B)(4).) Contains good discussion of circumstantial evidence of authenticity but no discussion as to the technical aspects of e-mail. As to hearsay objection, the e-mails were considered admissions of a party. (FRE 801(d)(2)(A).)

People v. Von Gunten (2002 Cal.App.3d Dist.) 2002 WL 501612. [Unpublished.]

Defendant laid an inadequate foundation of authenticity to admit, in prosecution for assault with a deadly weapon, hard copy of e-mail messages (instant messages) between one of his friends and the victim’s companion, as there was no direct proof connecting victim’s companion to the screen name on the e-mail messages.

United States v. Gagliardi, 506 F.3d 140, 151 (2d Cir. 2007)

Witness and undercover agent sufficiently authenticated emails and chat log exhibits by testifying that the exhibits were accurate records of communications they had had with the defendant.

United States v. Safavian, 435 F. Supp. 2d 36, 40 (D.D.C. 2006)

Emails that were not clearly identifiable on their own could be authenticated by comparison to other emails that had been independently authenticated).