Tweet
Can a twitter post by the defendant corroborating my claim be permissible in court?
-
"Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
"I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi -
No.Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View Post
But posts on Poly can be used.
You're ****ed. Deal with it.
Libraries are state sanctioned, so they're technically engaged in privateering. - Felch
I thought we're trying to have a serious discussion? It says serious in the thread title!- Al. B. Sure -
Can't e-mails be evidence? Why not texts and twitter posts?"Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
"I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben KenobiComment
-
Too easy to fake.
You're ****ed mate.
Deal with it.Libraries are state sanctioned, so they're technically engaged in privateering. - Felch
I thought we're trying to have a serious discussion? It says serious in the thread title!- Al. B. SureComment
-
What if they're still active? The judge can go on the internet and see the posts right there on twitter.com?Originally posted by Thoth View Post
Is that your account?
Yes
I see this post dated August 27th. Did you make this post on your twitter?"Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
"I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben KenobiComment
-
"No"Comment
-
That will be perjury.Originally posted by Aeson View Post"Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
"I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben KenobiComment
-
I don't even use twitter.Comment
-
Nuff said.Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View PostLibraries are state sanctioned, so they're technically engaged in privateering. - Felch
I thought we're trying to have a serious discussion? It says serious in the thread title!- Al. B. SureComment
-
I don't do Twitter, but I've read accounts of Twitter entries being allowed into evidence.Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
"Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ BraindeadComment
-
so what's this all about?"Comment
-
Yet another chapter in the sad little drama that is albie's life12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
1. Can you bring a print off of a website as evidence of a claim?
Undoubtedly yes if you do it according to court rules and procedure.
2. What are the court rules and procedure for this kind of evidence?
A good idea is to call the court registry and ask them.
In principle, I don't see why not. As long as it's relevant to the claim.
First, print off a copy of the site, or a cached copy if that's what you need.
Second, print off the copy and in a separate document type out the steps you took to find the cached material and the date and time at which you did so. Annex the copy to your explanation (noting that it is the copy you printed off). At the hearing, tender them both as evidence.
This can and is done on a regular basis in court and courts will accept it--but you have to follow court procedure. For example, it is possible that you will need to swear your explanation as an affidavit, and annex and mark the print out as being an annexure. And you may need to file it into court in advance and have it served on the defendant. This seems to me to be a likely requirement--but your mileage may vary. Ask the court registry if affidavit evidence is necessary in such a case. If they can't or won't help you, seek legal advice.
Some posters have mentioned that there is a problem with confirming identity in such cases. If you need to confirm the identity of the account, make sure the print off includes the name of account. If you can or must, find a tweet that only he/she could have made and which he/she couldn't possibly deny as being their own; or some other evidence that links her to it if you can."You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James NapierComment
-
Like Zevico I see no reason why something from Twitter could not be evidence but it will be subject to the same rules of evidence as any other things. For example, in Canada,I believe a prior consistent statement is not considered evidence. The fact that someone said or tweeted something 10 times that is consistent with their story is NOT evidence.
A party can tell their own story and cannot backdoor it by having other people saying what they said.
With tweets, the big issues may be ensuring that you have an accurate record and also showing/proving that the tweet was made by whom you are saying it did.
Also be certain that the tweet is relevant. Judges generally get annoyed if they feel their time is wasted so be sure the tweet can actually serve as evidence of something that is at issue ( ie they say they were never at a certain location but you have tweets from them describing what they were doing there. The evidentary standard in civil matters is lower so this type of stuff could get in even if you could never prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was their tweet.You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto LuongoComment
-
Huh? I thought your stab at extortion worked and you got your money back?"In the beginning was the Word. Then came the ******* word processor." -Dan Simmons, HyperionComment
Comment