COMMONWEALTH vs. ANTHONY STOKES.

The Defendant appealed his conviction for assault and battery on several grounds in this case. However, the one I am highlighting here is authentication of photographs. 

The defendant claimed the introduction of photographs of the alleged victim’s injuries was without proper authentication. The photographs did not have timestamps nor did the individual who took the photographs testify. The panel held the court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the photographs, reiterating that authentication is achieved by any witness affirming that the photographs are a fair and accurate representation of they represent.

It is commonly misunderstood that photographs, videos, texts, etc. MUST have some timestamp or at very least the person who took the photo/video to be admissible. 

That is simply not the case.  Basically anyone can authenticate a video if they observed the actual event, and can say that the video was an accurate and fair representation of what they saw.  Same goes for photographs.  

This case also included text messages, and the trial judge erroneously believed that the defendant must testify to authenticate the text messages.  That is not the case, as text messages can be authenticated in other ways, including identifying information such as a profile picture, phone number and records, or even whether the recipient knew who the texts came from.