Metadata In Arizona Public Records Can't Be Withheld 103
jasonbuechler writes in with news of the first state to declare that metadata is part of public records and must be released when the records are. "Hidden data embedded in electronic public records must be disclosed under Arizona's public records law, the state Supreme Court said Thursday... The Supreme Court's unanimous decision, which overturned lower court rulings, is believed to be the first by a state supreme court on whether a public records law applies to so-called metadata. 'This is at the cutting edge — it's the law trying to catch up with technology,' [one lawyer said]. The Arizona ruling came in a case involving a demoted Phoenix police officer's request for data embedded in notes written by a supervisor. The officer got a printed copy but said he wanted the metadata to see whether the supervisor backdated the notes to before the demotion."
Re:Sterilize documents (Score:1, Informative)
Then you would have a document time stamp, telling the lawyers this document was modified well after the incident. Prompting them to ask for the previous versions. Departments would be better served by not going back and altering records to support their actions.
Re:Smart police officer (Score:5, Informative)
I ran an ISP owned by a lawyer once upon a time. The guy before me I found out had embezzled like 60 grand by writing checks to his wife for "services rendered". I told the lawyer, and he said, "that figures" and went back to his work. I asked aren't you going to sue him? He said that smart lawyers never sue anyone themselves, it's much more profitable to sue for other people. He told me to make sure to pay taxes as if she was a contractor, and turned back to his work obviously not wanting to be disturbed again.
So two ambulance chasing lawyers would probably just file insurance, and be done with it :).
Re:So, were they back dated? (Score:3, Informative)
I know... as a resident of Arizona, I want an officer promoted who's intelligent enough to be aware of metadata, let alone its availability!
Here's the Amicus Brief
http://www.ananews.com/flyers/amicus_brief2009.pdf
and the Oral Argument Case Summary
http://www.supreme.state.az.us/argument/09Summaries/September%2024%20CV-09-0036-PR.pdf
Latin Grammar Police (Score:4, Informative)
It's not English that's fun, it's English borrowing foreign words that English speakers don't understand the rules for declension for that are fun. "Datus/Data/Datum" is the perfect passive participle of the Latin verb "dare", which means "to give". It's basically an adjective used as a substantive (i.e., a non-noun being used as a noun thanks to the power of implication) in this case.
As used in English, "Datum" (the neuter nominative singular) would most literally mean "(implied, but unspecified thing) having been given". "Data" would be the neuter nominative plural meaning "(implied, but unspecified things) having been given". So unless someone is transmitting only one unspecified thing, "data" is most appropriate in its level of mass noun vagueness.
Not Cutting Edge Law (Score:2, Informative)
The federal rules for civil procedure (FRCP) were updated in 2006 to address issues like this. Part of the FRCP is what guides production formats during civil suits. A lot of state courts are now using the FRCP as a guide for developing their own standards with regards to management of electronic data for legal purposes. This is the rule, pretty clear. http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule34.htm [cornell.edu]
Previously if you have 10,000 emails you could just print them out to loose piles of paper and turn over boxes (sometimes 100s of boxes) of paper to opposing counsel. After 2006 there is a default that the other side of a lawsuit is entitled to the documents in the same format they are kept in the course of business. This includes meta data and it is specifically mentioned in the FRCP. Most lawyers will make agreements during their discovery conferences (aka 30b6) to agree to production formats that both sides won't find unduly burdensome.
Re:change the metadata (Score:3, Informative)
What, you don't know how to set the clock on your computer back to June 1st, then fire up Word and type up the document? That amount of effort certainly doesn't take a techie or a fancy bit editor. It only takes a few drops of imagination. It's certainly within the skillset of your average cop.
The only requirement is that you set the clock back before creating the new doc. It won't work to set the clock back and try to edit it after the doc has been created. But in that case you'd just have to create another new doc and retype in the old text. It's no big deal, but when people are stressed out enough that they're forging "evidence" they're also likely in a rush, and may make a careless mistake.