larry【熟练级】
- I'm a network engineer that currently lives in China.
So wait maybe I misunderstand some of this. But you could not use online chatting messages as court evidences before? I mean that's kinda absurd. Nothing makes chatting messages different than real recording of the conversion or a legal document/contract. There should be nothing make online messages inadmissible or invalid in the court as long as they meet the three prerequisites: It must be authenticated as being what the admitting party claims it is.
It must be relevant to some material issue of fact in the case. it must not be more prejudicial than probative. If any evidences can meet these three requirements plus not being hearsay. then well yeah they're regular evidences
8 个回复 我要评论
Alcohollll 【资深级】 - 你看我可爱嘛?
赞同来自: Pokers 、shangrain9
感觉这方面可以参考多伦多大学的citizen lab的相关研究,他们在这方面做的研究比较厉害。可以参考:
https冒号//citizenlab点ca
yescyclone 【入门级】
赞同来自: Barry 、win004
想要伪造微信聊天记录并不难,所以,如果这些截图作为证据,相关部门肯定调取腾讯方面的用户个人隐私,那么问题来了,怎把防止有人利用这些规则,大肆窃取聊天记录等等隐私。
niadra 【入门级】
赞同来自: Sean
我就想知道如果被用户撤回了消息,微信或者QQ后台是否还会有记录
null 【入门级】 - null
这个应该没有直接相关性吧,聊天记录本来就是双方都有一份记录,一方删除不代表另一方也删除了。
不过微信的聊天记录肯定是有存服务器的,因为离线时的聊天记录在再次上线后可以接收到
larry 【熟练级】 - I'm a network engineer that currently lives in China.
So wait maybe I misunderstand some of this. But you could not use online chatting messages as court evidences before? I mean that's kinda absurd. Nothing makes chatting messages different than real recording of the conversion or a legal document/contract. There should be nothing make online messages inadmissible or invalid in the court as long as they meet the three prerequisites:
It must be authenticated as being what the admitting party claims it is.
It must be relevant to some material issue of fact in the case. it must not be more prejudicial than probative. If any evidences can meet these three requirements plus not being hearsay. then well yeah they're regular evidences
它必须与案件中某些重大事实有关。它一定不能比证明有偏见。如果有任何证据可以满足这三个条件,而且无传闻。它们是常规证据
I'm not a lawyer or have studied any paralegal stuffs. But from common sense that you should know anything can be used as evidences.
yescyclone 【入门级】
想要伪造微信聊天记录并不难,所以,如果这些截图作为证据,相关部门肯定调取腾讯方面的用户个人隐私,那么问题来了,怎把防止有人利用这些规则,大肆窃取聊天记录等等隐私。
Barry 【资深级】 - 换个头像,换个心情...
@yescyclone 正解,用户的截图肯定只能作为一个旁证。调查部门肯定是要调取腾讯服务器的前后内容才能作为真实的证据。现在确认这个消息,也就是说相关部门已经和腾讯的沟通或者说调取服务器内容的桥梁已经建好了。可以非常便捷的调取内容。只有这样整个证据链才完整。但是从另一个方面看这个问题就是任何用户的任何内容也可以被非常便捷的调取,这就存在隐私问题了。
Lucifer 【资深级】
按照我的理解,任何證據一開始代表的都是 "線索",因此都存在證據能力和範圍的問題。以台灣一些判例為例,LINE對話有證據力,但也不會在法庭上被輕易採認,仍然必須檢視完整對話,清楚來龍去脈後才能作為斷案參考或證據。換言之,"截圖" 最多只能做參考,還是要看軟件實際的紀錄,並且此紀錄需要經過驗證。以上都未必需要服務器有紀錄能力。如果斷案夠公正公平的話,應該如此吧...
p.s.微信在手機內的紀錄檔是SQL格式吧。確實存在單方面假造可能,但在證據驗證過程中若發現造假,應該是有偽證罪責的。這要看辯方如何主張證據無效了。
p.p.s.並不是認為微信可靠或沒有記錄... 基本上我不相信任何服務商的保證,哈哈