Facebook Messenger is one of the most popular messaging apps in the world, with over 1 billion monthly active users. With so many people using Messenger to communicate on a daily basis, an important legal question arises – can these messages be used as evidence in court?
The short answer is yes, Facebook Messenger chats can be admitted as evidence in both civil and criminal court cases, provided they are deemed authentic, relevant, and obtained legally. However, there are some caveats and things to consider when submitting Facebook messages as evidence in court.
Are Facebook Messenger chats considered hearsay?
Generally speaking, Facebook Messenger chats would be considered hearsay if introduced as evidence in court. Hearsay refers to an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. For example, if Person A sent a Facebook message to Person B that said “I saw Mark steal that watch,” and Person B wanted to introduce this message in court to prove that Mark did in fact steal a watch, it would be hearsay.
However, there are exceptions that allow hearsay to be admitted as evidence in court. Two potential exceptions that could apply to Facebook Messenger conversations are:
Party Admission Exception
If a party to the case made a statement in a Facebook Messenger chat, that statement can be admitted under the party admission exception to the hearsay rule. For example, if Person A was suing Person B for breach of contract, and Person B said “I know I was supposed to pay you by Monday but I still need more time” in a Facebook message, Person A could likely get this message admitted using the party admission exception.
Business Records Exception
If Facebook Messenger chats are kept and maintained by one of the parties as part of their regular course of business, they may be admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. There is some disagreement among courts as to whether this exception applies to social media records, but some courts have allowed it provided proper foundation is laid.
So in summary – while Facebook chats contain hearsay, they can still potentially be admitted under certain hearsay exceptions. The admissibility will depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.
How can the authenticity of Facebook Messenger chats be proved?
In order to introduce Facebook Messenger chats as evidence in court, their authenticity must be established. Here are some potential ways to prove that Messenger conversations are authentic:
Obtain Certified Records from Facebook
Facebook allows users to request copies of their account data and messages through their “Download Your Information” tool. This provides users with a download of their Facebook data that contains an archive of their messages. The downloaded files contain certificates of authenticity from Facebook. This can help establish that the messages are authentic Facebook communications if admitted as evidence in court.
Analyze Metadata
Metadata refers to data that provides information about other data. With Facebook Messenger chats, metadata can sometimes show the date, time, sender, receiver, and other relevant details about the messages. Analyzing the metadata associated with Messenger conversations can help corroborate their authenticity.
Obtain Sworn Testimony
Having a witness testify under oath that printed copies of Messenger conversations accurately reflect the communications that occurred can help establish authenticity. For example, if Person A is submitting Facebook messages allegedly sent by Person B, Person A could testify that they printed the messages directly from their Facebook account and that the copies are authentic reflections of the conversations.
Examine Witness Devices
The court can require witnesses to provide their smartphones and other devices for examination. A digital forensics expert can examine the device’s Messenger app data and history to see if the message content matches up. This can further help substantiate the authenticity of the conversations.
Analyze Writing Style
Looking at the writing style, grammar, punctuation, emoji/slang usage, etc. in the Facebook messages and comparing it to samples of known writing by the alleged sender can also help establish authenticity. However, this should not be the sole method used.
In summary, there are a variety of potential options for demonstrating the authenticity of Facebook Messenger conversations sought to be introduced in court. Utilizing multiple methods together provides the strongest proof of authenticity.
Can improperly obtained Facebook Messenger chats be used as evidence?
While Facebook Messenger conversations may generally be admissible if relevant and authentic, there are limitations around how the messages are obtained:
Warrantless Searches
If law enforcement or another party obtains someone’s Facebook messages without a proper warrant or court order, then they violate that person’s reasonable expectation of privacy under the 4th Amendment. Evidence obtained this way would likely be inadmissible in court under the exclusionary rule.
Hacking/Unauthorized Access
If someone hacks into another person’s Facebook account and accesses their private messages without permission, then those messages were obtained illegally. Courts will typically not allow the admission of illegally obtained evidence, as it would incentivize unlawful conduct.
Violations of Facebook’s Terms of Service
A party cannot break Facebook’s Terms of Service agreement in the process of obtaining someone’s Messenger chats. For example, if Person A gains unauthorized access to Person B’s phone and uses it to log into their Facebook account and take screenshots of private messages, those messages were obtained in violation of Facebook’s TOS and could potentially be inadmissible.
Illicit Surveillance
Parties cannot secretly record or surveil someone’s private Facebook Messenger conversations without their consent. This type of illegal surveillance could make the obtained messages inadmissible in court.
In summary, while Facebook messages may be admissible evidence, the way in which they are accessed or obtained is a key factor courts will consider. Messages obtained illegally or in violation of someone’s reasonable expectation of privacy will often not be allowed as evidence.
Relevance
In addition to being authentic and legally obtained, Facebook Messenger conversations sought to be admitted as evidence must be relevant to the particular legal issues and claims involved in the case. The messages must have some bearing on and make some fact of consequence more or less probable. Irrelevant Facebook chats should be excluded by the court.
Weight and Reliability Concerns
There are some inherent challenges to consider in regard to using Facebook Messenger conversations as strong, reliable evidence:
Editing
Unlike live testimony, written Facebook conversations can potentially be edited, deleted, or altered. However, examining metadata can help determine if manipulation occurred.
Sarcasm and Jokes
The tone and intent behind Messenger messages can sometimes be difficult to discern on their face. Sarcastic, humorous, or exaggerated statements may be taken literally.
Opinions vs. Facts
Messenger chats often contain a mix of opinions and facts. Determining which is which can influence the evidentiary value. Courts are less likely to treat opinions as compelling evidence.
Out of Context Concerns
Short excerpts from longer Messenger conversations may be misleading if the full context isn’t provided. The broader context can impact interpretive meaning.
Technology Barriers
Some judges and juries may lack full technology literacy around Facebook Messenger and struggle to understand, interpret, and assign appropriate weight to such evidence.
In general, the inherent informal nature of social media conversations means courts will look at their content rigorously when considering admissibility and evidentiary weight. But they can still serve as useful evidence when properly authenticated.
Examples of Facebook Messenger Evidence in Real Cases
Murder Cases
Prosecutors have introduced Facebook Messenger chats sent by defendants as incriminating evidence in various murder cases. For example, messages threatening the victim or discussing plans were used in convictions against Dedrick Darnell Williams for Cecilia Lam’s murder and against Korey Kauffman for Frank Carson’s murder.
Employment Disputes
Employees have used discriminatory or inappropriate Facebook messages sent by managers or coworkers as evidence in wrongful termination lawsuits and complaints before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Child Custody Cases
In child custody disputes, parents have introduced evidence of threatening or inappropriate Messenger messages sent by the other parent to raise concerns about their fitness as a custodial parent. These have factored into custody determinations by family courts.
Sexual Harassment Suits
Plaintiffs have successfully used unwanted, sexually explicit Facebook messages sent by alleged harassers as evidence to help prove sexual harassment claims, including in cases against oil and gas companies like Weatherford and Swift Energy.
Breach of Contract
In contract disputes, parties have used Messenger conversations acknowledging debts or agreements to establish breach of contract. These have helped plaintiffs secure favorable judgments in cases involving business deals gone wrong.
So in many types of civil and criminal matters, Facebook Messenger conversations obtained properly can serve as compelling supporting evidence to help prove legal claims and offenses.
Conclusion
In summary, Facebook Messenger chats can generally be admissible as evidence in both civil and criminal court proceedings, provided they are authenticated, relevant, legally obtained, and overcome hearsay concerns. While Facebook messages do present some inherent reliability concerns if not scrutinized carefully, they can still serve as useful evidentiary support when introduced properly. Parties seeking to submit Messenger conversations as evidence should take care to document metadata, obtain certified records from Facebook, have witnesses testify to authenticity, and only access messages lawfully to avoid exclusion. Overall, this type of social media evidence is becoming more common in an age where communication has shifted online for many.