<
p style=”text-align: justify;”>In a recent video hearing for the case Acevedo v. eXp, related to a sexual assault claim, a judge deliberated on whether to grant a protective order that would prevent a forensic examination of eXp founder and chairman Glenn Sanford’s cell phone during the discovery process.
The plaintiff argued that Sanford’s right to privacy does not override their request for electronically stored information (ESI) to review metadata. Courtrooms increasingly rely on text message screenshots as evidence, but the authenticity of these screenshots is frequently called into question. In a prior case, Sanford provided screenshots of text messages, but these alone failed to meet evidentiary standards for authenticity.
The Role of Forensic Analysis
Sanford submitted screenshots of text message conversations in court, which the plaintiffs argued were insufficient for evidentiary purposes. According to RisMedia, the self-collection method allegedly used by Sanford was inadequate. The US District Court for the Southern District of New York, under Judge Judith Rosenberg, issued a protective order requiring Sanford to collaborate with a digital evidence expert. This ensures that the extraction and verification of text messages from the physical device adhere to strict privacy safeguards.
Forensic analysis plays a pivotal role in ensuring the authenticity of digital evidence. The process retrieves all available data without bias, including potentially deleted content
[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.