|
|
|
|
|
by opendais
4237 days ago
|
|
I'd prefer a better educated populace that realizes the "technical evidence" being submitted in many cases is essentially witness testimony and not physical evidence [e.g. fingerprints on the murder weapon] which I think many people believe. Witness testimony is perfectly fine as long as it isn't implied to be anything greater than that. |
|
The metadata is technical evidence, not witness testimony. But...
Who wrote the software that collected the metadata? Any bugs in it? Any possibility that I did not, in fact, make that call?
Where was the metadata stored? Who had access to it? Could anybody have altered it, perhaps even to cover their own tracks?
Who had custody of the data after the records got pulled from the database? Any chance that they could have altered it? Maybe they knew that the prosecution's case was weak, and they wanted to make it look better?
In this way, technical evidence does in fact depend on witness testimony.