Lawyers - Question about evidence - Authentication of a letter?

Question

We have a problem in which an admission of a crime is to be offered against the defendant in the form of a letter. However, the letter is typed and not signed.

It would be admissable as an admission of a party opponent, however, I would argue that a typed letter with no signature cannot be authenticated (except by the defendant, who does not have to testify)

Even though the Federal Rules of Evidence are pretty clear (901 and 902), I am having trouble finding caselaw

Any suggestions or help would be greatly appreciated!

Answer 1

Authentication of the document is separate from the hearsay issue.

You are correct about the hearsay exemption for admissions.

But the document still needs to be authenticated to be admissible, and absent a signature, some other foundation must be laid (using admissible evidence) to show that the document is what it purports to be.

Authentication by the defendant is one option. Proving that the letter could only have been printed or typed on equipment under the sole control of the defendant is another. A witness who say the defending typing the letter (and remembers the letter's contents) would be yet another way to authenticate it.

Answer 2

Under the federal rules, admission of evidence is a decision at the discretion of the judge hearing the case. There's tons of caselaw on that - pick your circuit.

Meanwhile, you've solved the hearsay issue, but authentication, under these facts, is more difficult - though still possible.

If the letter is typed, there are expert witnesses who can trace the typewriting to a specific typewriter. The problem is that you would have to convince the judge that the defendant was the one who used that typewriter. That's not impossible.

If by typed what you mean is printed, from a computer, the problem is the same - tracing the printout to something the defendant wrote. That is technically possible, given the proper forensics work.