Any Computer techi's who can identify a Blue Petered e mail?

[snlc]

I have been presented with a Witness Statement from a solicitor which includes an 'alleged' email they sent me. This e mail I never received and as I'm complaining they hadn't contacted me for x months this is a 'convenient' addition to present to a court.

 

There are audit trails missing like senders email address, date and time which strikes me odd for a solicitor so, using Word I replicated exactly what has been put into the Witness Statement email like a carbon copy showing it is possible to manufacture this. Is there anyone on who knows enough about email construction who can tell me if, when printing from a 'sent items' list of documents an email - all or any emails come to that, from whatever system would carry the audit trail ?

 

all this email has is:

 

NAME OF PERSON (in caps)

------------------------------------- solid (looks typed) line

 

To: xxx@

 

subject: xxx

 

 

then the typed messege

 

Top r/h corner says Page 1 of 1

Bottom LEFT/H corner says a date xx/xx/2008

 

All my emails print this on the bottom Right and I use Outlook Express

 

 

It's a clever and convenient construction if it is, but not clever enough for me - a lot rides on this.

 

Thanks Tom

Edited August 27, 2008 by snlc

[snlc]

bump

[WebMaster]

You're asking which email client would display the email in this manner? I can't answer that.

 

You could ask them to forward you on the original email, but they could easily just doctor that anyway, so it might not be much help.

 

Who hosts your email account? If the email was sent recently and it's a helpful ISP, they may be able to tell you if they received the email or not

[snlc]

I can tell you my Outlook express is similar to theirs and I'd hazzard a guess and say it was the same. What I have is a document (paper one) which they have included in their legal documents for court stating that this is an email we sent the defendant(me). I'm saying it is manufactured because it doesn't a) I never received it and b) it doesn't carry any audit trails on it 'from or date & time' I can't print out any copy of any email I sent to anyone without all that coming up on the sheet. I just wanted to know if ALL emails carry these trails from whatever software people use, because if they do then this is definatley false evidence. I don't want to alert them by asking them, that would be crazy, I just needed someone to say it's normal for this to be included on an email print out. I just don't have enough computer knowledge to know.

[PGH7447]

It depends if they just cut the body of the email out and pasted it into a word doc, then there would be no audit trail, and if there was any date it would be easy to amend, the only way to get the true date sent / recieved is to print the whole email out

[snlc]

That wouldn't have happened because right up the top r/h corner is the page 1 of 1 and right at the bottom left hand corner is a date.

 

If this was cut and pasted it would have included the audit times and dates and the from between the 'to' and 'subject '

 

 

Mine normally reads:

. Page 1 of 1

Main Identity

___________________________________________

From:

To: [email protected]

Sent: 23 August 2008

Subject: manufactured emails

 

 

Message content

 

ihgdfhosdhlnvoiokdn#p[oSKJHJKNVHV

 

 

 

 

. 23/08/08

 

 

 

Theirs:

. Page 1 of 1

Main Identity

________________________________________________

 

To: [email protected]

 

Subject: manufactured emails

 

 

Contents ;iuashnLSKHVIUDHL M

 

 

 

 

 

23/08/2008

 

MY TOP EXAMPLE WITH THE DOT BEFORE THE DATE SHOULD SHOW THE DATE TO THE RIGHT, BUT THIS POSTING ON FORUM DOESN'T ALLOW IT TO SHOW THE SPACE BETWEEN THE DOT AND THE R/H SIDE.

The bottom one ' Theirs' the Page 1 0f 1 is on the right, but the date at the bottom is on the left as shown.

Edited August 27, 2008 by snlc

[PGH7447]

you could print the email out, scan it into word then do what you want with it

 

if you want a true picture of an email then get them to do a screen shot, then it is a bit more difficult to doctor

[snlc]

you could print the email out, scan it into word then do what you want with it

 

if you want a true picture of an email then get them to do a screen shot, then it is a bit more difficult to doctor

 

 

Can you imagine a solicitor going to that trouble when he's trying to convince a court he sent it? - I know it can be done and you can do anything, but think 'simple' - if you are between a rock and a hard place you conjour up a document to brige the gap - quickest way possible, you would/I would just print out from the records I have on the PC the actual email - this is evidence after all - he'd hardly want to hack it about - he'd want as much convincing material on there to prove his point.

 

I think what you guys are showing is that whilst, like I have done in creating a carbon copy quite simply of what they sent in a Word document, which took me all of 5 minutes, to replicate this document they have provided the court they would have to play with a document - that didn't/wouldn't happen in reality.

 

That's what I needed to know - thanks.

[Lula]

Hang on a minute, a solicitor sending emails to a defendent? to be sure of receipt a solicitor would send a letter Recorded delivery, if you never got an email, just say so and also say that you doubt the veracity of the mail that they forwarded to you.

[snlc]

Hang on a minute, a solicitor sending emails to a defendent? to be sure of receipt a solicitor would send a letter Recorded delivery, if you never got an email, just say so and also say that you doubt the veracity of the mail that they forwarded to you.

 

 

Thanks Lula, I'll do that too.. will reveal all next week.

[PGH7447]

Can you imagine a solicitor going to that trouble when he's trying to convince a court he sent it? - I know it can be done and you can do anything, but think 'simple' (You asked if it could be done the answer is yes, make your mind up to what you want) - if you are between a rock and a hard place you conjour up a document to brige the gap - quickest way possible, you would/I would just print out from the records I have on the PC the actual email - this is evidence after all - he'd hardly want to hack it about - he'd want as much convincing material on there to prove his point. I must be SIMPLE Cause I dont understand what you are now after

 

I think what you guys are showing is that whilst, like I have done in creating a carbon copy quite simply of what they sent in a Word document, which took me all of 5 minutes, to replicate this document they have provided the court they would have to play with a document - that didn't/wouldn't happen in reality. Really

 

That's what I needed to know - thanks.

 

:idea:

[snlc]

(You asked if it could be done the answer is yes, make your mind up to what you want) excuse me?

 

I asked if an email- any email could be sent without an audit trail by someone. I know exactly what I am asking and it is Simple.

 

I've received a paper document without a sent by or date on which is being used in evidence against me to make it look as though one was sent..

 

I created a carbon copy in Word to show the court how easy it was to falsify, what I was doing here on CAG was asking people with a knowldge of computer technology if emails in a sent box (which is where I presume a retrieved email would be kept on this solicitors PC) would always carry the audit trail rather than the basic info I posted above. I don't think that was too difficult to derive from my post.

[revolting peasant]

How crucial to their case is the alleged email?

 

It strikes me that if it was anything that important a Judge would probably rule it as inadmissable anyway due to the method of communication used.

[snlc]

Well it is quite crucial in that the company and solcitors (all one firm) never answered letters from us. Sounds fanciful, but it's true I have all recorded delivery receipts. Now I have applied to have their claim struck out because they failed to supply documents under CPR rules. In their witness statement they produced this alleged ' email ' I never received (I keep all official emails) stating they would not get into extended correspondence which covers their a*ses. I'm talking about 6 months worth of letters I sent, so it is quite important to show this 'might' have been a doctored document. I know it happens, seen it enough with the banks and DCA's, I'd just like some concrete proof that it couldn't possibly be a print out of a real one.

 

Also, I believe electronic communications are deemed admissable this day and age.

Tom

[locutus]

I'd be tempted to contact my email supplier and see if they have records of recieved mail on the specified date. Can you imagine thier face in court if you had a letter from your email provider stating they didn't send you an email on that date?

[snlc]

my email supplier? can you do this? that would be handy. It's BT they'd have details would they?

[locutus]

Yes, but how fast they'd be able to get them to you, and what department I've no idea!

[Alphageek]

Did the solicitor have your email address at the time they said they sent you the contentious email?

 

I don't give them mine until time is of the essence near a Court date. If you're like me, then perhaps they can't have emailed you as they didn't have your address yet?

[snlc]

Thanks for this, I'm clutching at straws a bit because I know so litlle, but can you tell me or do you know whether the:

 

From:

To:

c.c (only shows if you cc someone)

Sent:

Subject:

 

at the top of emails when printed can be modified within a system or would be modified in systems ( think a solicitors firm here) to just produce this:

 

To:

Subject:

 

without showing the senders email address, date or time sent?

 

I'm looking for probability, not whether some IT engineer can do it - we all know anything is possible, but I'm looking to see in all probability in a normal working legal environment where emails are sent back and forth all the time if it's likely an email would be sent which omitted these 2 crucial stats.

[snlc]

Did the solicitor have your email address at the time they said they sent you the contentious email?

 

I don't give them mine until time is of the essence near a Court date. If you're like me, then perhaps they can't have emailed you as they didn't have your address yet?

 

 

They were given it to respond to something else so they would have had it thanks.

[Alphageek]

An SMTP session always has to have a FROM: in it.

 

As you say, their IT Dept could have made a custom form to print only the info you can see, but it is not possible for you to receive an email that has no From: address in it.

 

I don't know of any email systems that do not timestamp emails either.

 

Email headers almost always follow this pattern:

 

From: [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Hello

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:33:00 -0700

 

and these details in the header are what are used to show you your "list" of emails on Outlook Express (for example) and also to print the email.

[Alphageek]

Forgot to ask: Do you check your SPAM folder via BT's webmail regularly?

 

It might have ended up in there?

[locutus]

see if you have a copy of your emails saved here

https://login.yahoo.com/config/login?.slogin=&.intl=uk&.src=&.bypass=&.partner=bt-1&.done=http%3a//bt.yahoo.com/loginredir%3f.partner=bt-1%26.intl=uk%26.done=http%253a//mail.yahoo.com%253f.partner%253dbt-1&pkg=&owd=

[PGH7447]

(You asked if it could be done the answer is yes, make your mind up to what you want) excuse me? your welcome

I asked if an email- any email could be sent without an audit trail by someone. I know exactly what I am asking and it is Simple. NO it cant can it be fabricates YES

 

I've received a paper document without a sent by or date on which is being used in evidence against me to make it look as though one was sent.. As pointed out earlier

 

I created a carbon copy in Word to show the court how easy it was to falsify, what I was doing here on CAG was asking people with a knowldge of computer technology if emails in a sent box (which is where I presume a retrieved email would be kept on this solicitors PC) would always carry the audit trail rather than the basic info I posted above. I don't think that was too difficult to derive from my post yes it was you asked can an email be sent without an audit trail then you went on to say how easy it is to fabricate.

 

[snlc]

An SMTP session always has to have a FROM: in it.

 

As you say, their IT Dept could have made a custom form to print only the info you can see, but it is not possible for you to receive an email that has no From: address in it.

 

I don't know of any email systems that do not timestamp emails either.

 

Email headers almost always follow this pattern:

 

From: [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Hello

Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:33:00 -0700

 

and these details in the header are what are used to show you your "list" of emails on Outlook Express (for example) and also to print the email.

 

 

Thank you.