Text Messages

[capellam44]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Colorado
I need to use some text messages against a renter that skipped out on his rent. I am wondering if they are admissible in court, and in what form. Obviously it is difficult to scroll through messages and takes up courts time. I have e-mailed each one to myself, but the original date and time are not included in the e-mail. I also transcribed the messages with dates and time.

Really, what is it that I can do to get the court to accept the messages? Court date is this Wednesday Jan 25th

 

[tranquility]

If this is grown up court, the other side will make an objection to their introduction and should win.

You need the custodian of the records (phone company) to provide them. It would require a subpoena and it is not going to happen in two days.

 

[capellam44]

Grown up court?
This is county Civil court. I have contacted the phone company they said they do not have the ability to recover text messages. They are sent between phones and do not have any recorders of them.

Thank you for your time

 

[tranquility]

I'm sorry, we get a little jargony here after a while and sometimes talk to each other as much as the OP.

By grown up court I mean any court other than small claims. Sometimes, small claims courts do not follow the rules of evidence closely as it is more informal. Because of this, things which would not be allowed if the rules of evidence were followed, can sometimes get in--like text messages you transcribed.

Some carriers keep the message for a while. It is NOT sent from phone to phone, but goes through phone company's servers. AT&T keep the message for a few days and Verizon claims much longer. Both keep a record of certain information, who sent, where to, length and such for a lot longer. (Years)

Here is what will happen. You will want to introduce the text as from him. He will object for facts not in evidence or lack of foundation. The objection will sustained as you have not yet established a predicate the texts were, in fact, from him. How can you do this? Did you see him make the text at the time?

One way to get it in is to get a log verified from the phone company. Match it up with your records and you may establish some connection. Until then, the objection will always be sustained.

 

[capellam44]

Thank you for clarifying. I contacted AT&T who have provided me with a detailed list of activity for the months I need. It proves that there was indeed a message sent from the defendants number to me. Along with the transcription and time stamps, and the use of a good highlighter, I am hoping that this is now allowed into court. Thank you

 

[tranquility]

Now, you need your record to match them up. Also, you needed the records verified by an employee of the company under oath. Otherwise you will not be able to overcome the objection.

I'd spend less time focusing on the text message and more time on the facts. It's clear you are a pro per and have no idea of the difficulty of getting them in. You will testify and, I assume, he will testify as well. Why is that not good enough? What do you think the text messages will prove?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

I would suggest bringing the transcripts you made, along with photographs of the messages on the screen of the phone, and the phone itself. That way you may be able to leave the paper with the court and take your phone home when you go.

 

[tranquility]

That might work if the other side was also pro per and didn't know how to deal with the situation.

Edit edit:
I can understand the removal of the websites which spoof sms messages, even though my purpose was to show how easy it is to do, from my post. But, a link to a .pdf of a court case? Is this a megauploads fear or are we not allowed to link any longer?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

That might work if the other side was also pro per and didn't know how to deal with the situation.

I'd say that's quite likely, since the defendant is someone who (allegedly) skipped out on the rent.

Even they don't get admitted, it would be useful to have the transcript handy in court to use while cross examining the defendant, if the opportunity arises.

It can do no good if left at home.

 

[quincy]

Cell phones are often not allowed into a courtroom.

 

[HomeGuru]

Cell phones are often not allowed into a courtroom.

**A: yes, I have seen some judges take then and not give them back.

 

[capellam44]

Thanks everyone for the advice. I wouldn't put it past this man to be have a tiny bit of knowledge on court proceedings. I know he had pre paid legal and that is how he managed to file a counterclaim in the manner in which he did. Despite this, I am confident that even without the text messages that I can prove my case, and disprove his. I have the lease, receipts, and signed documents. The only thing he can get me on is lack of carbon monoxide alarms, and I have since installed them.

 

[Ohiogal]

Now, you need your record to match them up. Also, you needed the records verified by an employee of the company under oath. Otherwise you will not be able to overcome the objection.

I'd spend less time focusing on the text message and more time on the facts. It's clear you are a pro per and have no idea of the difficulty of getting them in. You will testify and, I assume, he will testify as well. Why is that not good enough? What do you think the text messages will prove?

Actually not necessarily. He can testify that he received the messages and when as well a why he BELIEVES they are from the defendant. As such, the court can accept it but the weight they give that evidence will be what matters. I have used this very method in "grown up court" to get text messages into evidence.

 

[tranquility]

That is very unusual in e-evidence. I think it shows more the ignorance of judges rather than the proper foundation. If someone being tried in the court you're talking about got a hold of the websites I posted, they could easily subvert justice. Probably a good thing they were removed.

(Pity about the case though. It walked through the introduction of sms in a trial.)

 

[Ohiogal]

That is very unusual in e-evidence. I think it shows more the ignorance of judges rather than the proper foundation. If someone being tried in the court you're talking about got a hold of the websites I posted, they could easily subvert justice. Probably a good thing they were removed.

(Pity about the case though. It walked through the introduction of sms in a trial.)

It went to the weight of the evidence and not to the admissibility of the evidence. My client testified to receiving the texts and what was in the texts. She could do that. She could NOT testify that she was 100% sure that the texts were from opposing party -- that would be a legal conclusion. It helped though that the opposing party -- though represented -- was an egomaniac whose last statement to me while under oath was the following exchange:

Me: You told her your family would lie for you, didn't you?
Him: Yes.
Me: Why would you tell her that?
Him: Because my family will say whatever I want them to.
Me: No further questions your honor.
Magistrate: Any redirect? No? Well, you are dismissed.
Opposing counsel: I would like to call his sister to the stand.



Seriously. ACTUAL testimony from that case.