Commonwealth v. Amaral
78 Mass. App. Ct. 671
Mass. App. Ct.2011Background
- undercover operation: trooper posed as 15-year-old on Craigslist; defendant Jeremy Amaral connected to Yahoo account rdwmercury2006@yahoo.com; 37 pages of email exchanges between Jeremy and Ashley; Yahoo account login tied to Jeremy; arrest after meeting arranged via phone call with defectively verified number; court admitted Yahoo business record (Exhibit A) and emails (Exhibit G); best evidence issue discussed but duplicates allowed; conviction on attempted rape of a child and solicitation of a prostitute; acquittal on enticing a child; sufficiency of documentary evidence evaluated in light of digital age
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Yahoo document as business record | Yahoo record satisfies §803(6) requirements | Yahoo has no trustworthiness; not a business record | Admissible as a business record |
| Authentication and best evidence of emails | Emails authenticated via defendant's actions and responses | Authentication weak; best evidence concerns | Emails authenticated; best evidence rule not dispositive |
| Weight of Exhibit A and G in proving identity | When combined with other evidence, enough to identify defendant | Identities too weak on their own | Weight strengthens with corroborating evidence; guilt established |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 456 Mass. 857 (Mass. 2010) (authentication via telephone-like evidence; limitations of MySpace analogue)
- Wingate v. Emery Air Freight Corp., 385 Mass. 402 (Mass. 1982) (business record admissibility and reliance on entrant's knowledge)
- Commonwealth v. Weichell, 390 Mass. 62 (Mass. 1983) (computer data/duplicate admissibility; best evidence considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Leneski, 66 Mass. App. Ct. 291 (Mass. App. Ct. 2006) (digital images; best evidence rule not applicable)