DOJ-OGR-00006669.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 446 Filed 11/12/21 Page7of1i1 the package did not match the item. Simply stated, the evidence collection and retention in this matter is an unreliable mess. A. Message Pads The Government contends that various message pads were seized from different locations by the Palm Beach Police Department and appears to intend to offer hundreds of the messages as evidence at trial. See, e.g., Government Exhibits 1 through 4-K. Many of the alleged messages are undated, un-signed, contain various hearsay statements that do not appear to be relevant to this case, are outside the applicable time frame alleged in the indictment. B. “CPU’s,” “Zip CD’s,” “CD’s,” and “Flash Cards” The search warrant inventory identifies numerous electronic storage devices as having been seized. However, no actual inventory of the alleged contents of these drives appears to have been prepared by anyone in the Palm Beach Police Department. The items were not identified by hard drive name or number or photo. Accordingly, there exists no way for anyone to accurately identify what content may have been on any particular device and how that device may or may not relate to any issue in this case. C. Photos The inventory also lists the seizure of “Photos.” Many of the photos are not identified with any particularity. II. The Proposed Evidence Is Inadmissible Because of a Lack of Authenticity and Personal Knowledge Evidence may be authenticated through direct or circumstantial proof. United States v. Al-Moayad, 545 F.3d 139, 172 (2d Cir. 2008)). “The chain of custody is ordinarily a method of authentication for physical evidence.” United States v. Gelzer, 50 F.3d 1133, 1140 (2d Cir. DOJ-OGR-00006669