Be Aware of Evidence on Social Media Involving Anticipated or Pending Investigations or Litigation

By Eric Marcy |   Dec. 27, 2016

            Under the recent case of State v. Hannah, Docket No. A-5741-14T3, (N.J. App. Div. Decided December 20, 2016; approved for publication), the courts have confirmed how Twitter postings may be authenticated.   Social media postings may now be authenticated as any other “writing” under New Jersey Rule of Evidence 901.  Despite the ease in which digital media may be manipulated, the court rejected an argument for a higher standard for authentication.  The court confirmed that a combination of circumstantial factors related to the posting, such as context, prior communications, expressing specific knowledge of an event/issue, profile information, and photographs may establish sufficient authentication.  Social media has become a rich source of information for litigation and authentication is possible through direct proof, circumstantial evidence, contents/knowledge, reply and other miscellaneous methods of establishing reliability as any other form of writing.

Read More

Topics : Criminal Law, Evidence, Social Media, twitter evidence, evidence spoliation, Investigations, Authentication | 0 Comments Read More

WATCH OUT FOR THE “PSYCHOPATHS” THE PSYCHOPATHY CHECKLIST-REVISED (PCL-R)©

By Eric Marcy |   Dec. 16, 2016


CHALLENGING SO-CALLED "OBJECTIVE" TESTING

Read More

Topics : Mental Health, Criminal Law, Psychological Test, Parole, experts, Psychology | 0 Comments Read More

Getting Off of Megan’s Law Registration When the Conviction Occurred in New Jersey and the Registrant Lives in Another State – Catch-22 – They Don’t Make it Easy

By Eric Marcy |   May. 26, 2016

            There is a new twist in applying for release from the burdensome requirements of Megan’s Law registration and Parole/Community Supervision for Life.  When the original Megan’s Law Order is entered in New Jersey and the person has subsequently moved to another State, some County Prosecutors may object to an application to vacate the registration/notification Order, asserting a lack of jurisdiction.   States have their own variations of offenses that require registration and the type of notification issues that result.  This has been viewed by some prosecutor's as depriving New Jersey of the jurisdictional authority to vacate its own original registration/notification Order.  That a registrant resides in another State should not deny that person the ability to return to New Jersey and seek a modification of the original New Jersey Order.  

Read More

Topics : Criminal Law, NJ Criminal Justice Process, Megan's Law | 0 Comments Read More

The Millon™ Clinical Multiaxial Inventory Testing The Use And Validity Of The MCMI-III™ In Court Cases

By Eric Marcy |   Feb. 4, 2016

The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (“MCMI-III”™) is a popular assessment tool used by clinical psychologists, that has been in use since approximately 1977. This instrument has been the subject of many articles and books.[1] The theoretical basis derives from Millon’s theory of personality development, personality types, and personality disorders. The instrument relies on 175 “self-report” true false questions, which are dependent upon a subject’s self awareness and providing accurate responses to the questions. [2] Similar to other testing instruments the Millon attempts to build in validity scales to account for any misrepresentation of symptoms and attempts to “detect” "invalid profiles.”[3] The MCMI-III Manual itself specifically acknowledges “limitations and qualifications” regarding its use. The data derives from clinical sampling and “are applicable only to individuals who evidence problematic emotional and interpersonal symptoms or who are undergoing professional psychotherapy or a psycho diagnostic evaluation” and “the samples employed for such purposes are best drawn only from comparable clinical populations.” (T. Millon, R. Davis, P. Millon, , MCMI-III Manual, 2nd ed. (1997), at p. 6.[4] It “is not a general personality instrument to be used with normal populations or for purposes other than diagnostic screening or clinical assessment.”[5] Similar to the MMPI-2, the MCMI-III results may generate computer generated report, the manual itself cautions that “reading a computerized report is no substitute for clinical judgment. Only those trained in the limits of psychological tests are qualified to interpret them."[6] Read More

Topics : Criminal Defense, Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), Scientific Evidence, Criminal Law, Psychological Test, discovery, Eric Marcy, Parole, Domestic Violence, Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP), Evidence, Healthcare, experts | 0 Comments Read More

    All Blog Posts

    Subscribe to Email Updates

    Featured Blogger

    Eric Marcy

    Eric Marcy

    Click Here to Read My Latest Blog Post

    Categories

    see all