Julian Ackert — Direct/Cross/Redirect
238 linesTHE COURT: All right. Your next witness.
THE COURT: Allright. Plaintiff rests their rebuttal case. All right. Defendant counterclaim rebuttal case.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Yes, Your Honor. May we approach?
THE COURT: Sure.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Your Honor, I think just for the record --
MR. ROTTENBORN: Sorry. So sorry. Just for the record, I think we would need to renew our motion to strike at this time, I'm happy to just do it right here. We don't have to leave -- let the jury.
THE COURT: That's fine. May 26, 2022
MR. CHEW: I think you're tired of hearing the same. I shouldn't presume that. I assume you're tired.
THE COURT: Just leave it at tired.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Yeah, so basically, Your Honor, as required by the rules, we renew-our motion to strike on the following grounds. After concluding all the evidence short of Ms. Heard's . rebuttal case, no reasonable jury could find for Mr. Depp for the following reasons: The statements relating to the statements that Ms. Heard made are not defamatory. This is for a 13.number of reasons, but as it relates to this motion, it's because the undisputed evidence shows that Mr. Depp did not -- did abuse Ms. Heard, at a minimum, emotionally, verbally, psychologically and otherwise. That's undisputed.
MR. ROTTENBORN: It is disputed whether he abused her physically, though we -- and we understand that that's a question for the jury, - but even if he was abusive a single time, in any way, then we -- Ms. Heard prevails. Second ground is that the headline was not defamatory. She didn't write or approve it. Merely linking to an article does not establish the element of defamation, and the words in her tweet did not affirmatively reiterate the statement or add context or direct the statement to a new audience in a way required for republication. The third ground, Your Honor, is that no jury could find, based on the evidence as' described in our motion, and has come out in. Ms. Heard's case, that Ms. Heard acted with actual 12'malice. And that includes the testimony of both, Terence Dougherty, Ms.
MR. ROTTENBORN: Heard herself, Eric George, and: others. For those reasons, we believe the Court should enter summary judgment on Mr. Depp's- claim in favor of Ms. Heard.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. CHEW: Mr. Depp respectfully opposes the motion to strike for the grounds stated in our written motion and oral argument. There are a myriad of issues in dispute, including the legal issue as to whether verbal abuse occurred or would even be germane here because the clear implication of the defamatory statements is physical abuse. But in any event, for the reasons previously stated and incorporated by reference, Plaintiff Depp believes the motion to strike should, again, be denied.
THE COURT: All right. MR, CHEW: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Anything further?
MR. ROTTENBORN: No. I'll just -- rest on my argument.
THE COURT: Motion to strike is denied for the reasons previously given by the Court. I previously didn't strike, okay?
MR. ROTTENBORN: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: While you are still up here, just a couple housekeeping matters. The sketch artist yesterday was sketching the jury, so I have that now. Not going to do anything with it. I took it. She knows, she's been notified. She thought she could do it, she knows now she can't. I went through public affairs of Fairfax County, they went back and told all the sketch artists and the photographers, no pictures of the jury. That's taken care of. One thing I don't think I ever put on the record is in the very beginning, the jurors asked if they could have jigsaw puzzles while they're waiting, and I said okay, as long as I knew what they were, for obvious reasons. So they have been doing a fish jigsaw puzzle and did a landscape jigsaw puzzle for lighthouses, and.
THE COURT: Then I gave them one that was a Life is Good jigsaw puzzle, but I am going to be taking all the jigsaw puzzles away from them. They've completed two and they are almost done with their third. But I think they had a team building exercise there, but I'm going to be taking them away from them this afternoon, okay? I wanted to put it on the record. And if you talk to the jurors later and they talk about jigsaw puzzles, I didn't --
THE COURT: Aquaman or Pirates of the PLANE| WWW 67480 to May 26, 2022 Caribbean.
THE COURT: I just wanted to get that on the record in case you talk to the jurors and they start talking about jigsaw puzzles.
MR. ROTTENBORN: I hope they can finish the third.
THE COURT: They've got about 50 pieces left, so we will see.
THE COURT: Thank you, Your Honor.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Rebuttal evidence.
MR. MURPHY: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Murphy.
MR. MURPHY: We:call Mr. Julian Ackert. Okay. Mr. Ackert. Julian Ackert
DR. GILBERT: A witness called on behalf of the defendant and counterclaim plaintiff, having been first duly sworn by the clerk, testified as follows:
MR. MURPHY: What is your profession?
JULIAN ACKERT: I am a computer forensics investigator.
MR. MURPHY: Where are you employed?
JULIAN ACKERT: I work for a company called iDiscovery Solutions. or IDS.
MR. MURPHY: And what is your title? <A I'ma managing director.at that company.
MR. MURPHY: Q What services does IDS perform? A IDS provides consulting, expert testimony, forensic analysis, data analysis, electronic data, review and production services, all to the business and legal community.
MR. MURPHY: What, if any, of those services performed by IDS have you performed?
JULIAN ACKERT: I perform all of those services.
MR. MURPHY: How many years of experience do you have in computer forensics investigation?
JULIAN ACKERT: I've worked in the industry for 1120 years.
MR. MURPHY: Can you, please, describe that 13-experience to the jury? 14. A [have experience creating and implementing data preservation and collection strategies, doing data collections and a forensically sound matter, extracting data from collections, as well as analysis and metadata analysis of the evidence that I extract.
MR. MURPHY: You mentioned collecting data from forensic collections. What material are you forensically imaging? forensically imaging?
JULIAN ACKERT: This would be any type of material that stores digital evidence, an iPhone, an iPad, a tablet, laptop, a cloud account, your Gmail account. Anything that has digital evidence.
MR. MURPHY: Have you published in your areas of expertise?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes. I've published on data preservation and collection and analysis strategies.
MR. MURPHY: Have you ever given any trainings or presentations to other individuals in the e-discovery area? 13. A Yes, I have. I do trainings and presentations to lawyers through continuous learning education.
MR. MURPHY: What, if any, professional certifications do you have?
JULIAN ACKERT: I have a GIAC GCFE. That's the GIAC Certified Forensic Examiner certification.
MR. MURPHY: What were the requirements of obtaining that certification? To obtain that certification, you need May 26, 2022 a minimum number of hours in the field, as well as you need to pass a test with a certain degree a certain percentage of passing.
MR. MURPHY: Do you belong to any professional organizations?
JULIAN ACKERT: I do. I'm a member of a conference called the Sedona Conference; it's a conference that is a group of legal professionals, judges, and technologists, and we discuss the intersection of law and technology, and technology issues in the legal community.
MR. MURPHY: And when did you first serve as an expert witness? ; 17. A_ I believe that would have been around 2009, was the first time I served.
MR. MURPHY: Have you previously been qualified as an expert witness in the field of computer forensics?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, I have. I've been qualified, probably, a half dozen to a dozen times in both federal and state court, including this court right here.
MR. MURPHY: And has a court ever declined to qualify you as an expert witness?
JULIAN ACKERT: No, they have not.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, I offer Julian Ackert as an expert in the field of computer forensics.
MR. DENNISON: No objection, Your
THE COURT: So moved. Could you spell your last name for me, Mr. Ackert?
JULIAN ACKERT: Ackert, A-C-K-E-R-T. -
THE COURT: Thank you so much, sir.
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Ackert, what is forensic imagining?
JULIAN ACKERT: Forensic imaging is the process of capturing the data on a digital device in a forensically sound manner.
MR. MURPHY: And how is a forensic copy created? Using specialized software that's available to forensic investigators, we're able to collect the data from devices. And that software may vary depending on the device like a phone or a laptop.
MR. MURPHY: What type of information does a forensic image collect?
JULIAN ACKERT: It's meant to really collect everything on the device, so, for example, on a laptop, it's going to collect your documents, your emails, your photographs, your documents, like Excel spreadsheets, PDF files, any applications that you ran, the history of what you've opened or looked at on the laptop, as well as all of the metadata for these different types of electronically stored information files.
MR. MURPHY: And does any other information accompany that information that's collected? Typically, with the forensic imaging, you're also going to get log files. Log files are files that help you validate the forensic image and verify that it was a forensically sound data collection. collection.
MR. MURPHY: And how do log files enable you to do that?
JULIAN ACKERT: Log files list information within the files. Sometimes they're even embedded within the images themselves, but they provide verification information that allows you to authenticate the image and the data on the image.
MR. MURPHY: What is the purpose of creating a forensic image of devices or data?
JULIAN ACKERT: In order to extract and analyze data, forensically, for the courts, you need to create a forensic image of the data first and gather the forensic — gather the data from the forensic image.
MR. MURPHY: And what, if any, specific types of data are collected in that image and extraction?
JULIAN ACKERT: It's going to be any type of data that comes from the image, whether you're extracting photographs or documents or spreadsheets or anything of that nature.
MR. MURPHY: Do you recall Mr. Neumeister mentioning the term hashing yesterday? to May 26, 2022
JULIAN ACKERT: I do.
MR. MURPHY: What is that?
JULIAN ACKERT: Hashing is essentially a digital fingerprint of a file. It's a valuation of the binary 1s and 0s or how the file is stored on a hard drive, and it examines the 1s and 0s in a manner that gives every file a digital fingerprint, essentially, and identifies the uniqueness of the file.
MR. MURPHY: What, if any, applicability does hashing have to the visual appearance of data?
JULIAN ACKERT: Hashing has nothing to do with the visual appearance. For example, if I had a Word Document that I printed and then saved, therefore, 15] haven't visually changed the Word Document, the metadata of that Word Document indicating that I printed it would be different, and, therefore, that Word Document would not hash to the version that I used before printing.
MR. MURPHY: Can you give any examples of digital photographs that visually appear the same not hashing?
JULIAN ACKERT: I believe Mr. Neumeister included three of those in his demonstratives yesterday, three | side-by-side photographs that looked visually the same but did not hash. It-made sense that they wouldn't hash. Each of them had different file sizes. And a file size changes for a photograph depending on what you do with the photograph. So, for example, maybe you want to take that photograph and email it to somebody, or on your phone, you choose to use a small, medium or large, or a different size of the photograph when you email.
JULIAN ACKERT: When you send that email with that photograph, you've changed the hash value because you've changed the 1s and 0s because you've changed the size of the photograph.
MR. MURPHY: And what, if anything, do you recall from Mr. Neumeister's testimony regarding Photos 3?
JULIAN ACKERT: Mr. Neumeister was concerned about a particular metadata field, EXIF metadata, which there's two types of metadata for files. There's the embedded metadata, which is what we're discussing here, the EXIF metadata and external metadata. Mr. Neumeister was concerned with embedded metadata within the file that indicated that the software version that the file last ran through is Photos.
MR. MURPHY: What is Photos 3.0?
JULIAN ACKERT: Photos is actually the software application that's built into the Apple/Macintosh operating system for laptops. This is the application that launches by default when you're on an Apple computer and use Photos.
MR. MURPHY: What are the capabilities of Photos 3.0?
JULIAN ACKERT: Multiple capabilities for it. You can, for example, create an album with it and put multiple photos within an album. You can organize or sort your photos by date and time taken or place. You can also use that to edit photos.
MR. MURPHY: You mentioned metadata earlier. What is that?
JULIAN ACKERT: Metadata is information about a file. For example, with a document, it could be when was For example, with a document, it could be when was the document created or last saved or who saved it? Who was the author of the documents. For photographs, metadata includes information that you've seen on demonstratives before, including when was the image taken? What kind of phone took the image? What software was originally used for that image? Any type of information inside the photograph, the EXIF data that you've heard, is metadata.
MR. MURPHY: Did you form any opinions in response to Mr. Neumeister's testimony regarding Photos 3.0 appearing in a software EXIF metadata field? 13. A Yes, I did. 14. Q What are those? My opinion is that for each of the photos that he identified, for all but one in his demonstrative, I actually found the equivalent original photo that did not have Photos in the EXIF metadata. In other words, those are the photos.that he indicated he would have expected to see the iOS or the phone software version on those photos. May 26, 2022 How do you know it is an original version of the photograph?
JULIAN ACKERT: Well, this is a little bit dependent on the Apple ecosystem. Amber uses Apple devices, and those devices, by definition of how Apple works, synchronize your information from device to device. So, for example, if you take a photo on your phone, you see that same photo on your tablet or your iPad or iCloud account, or even your MacBook, and that's all because of user experience. Apple wants you to be able to see and visually have the same experience on all your devices. So the photo that was originally taken traverses or gets synchronized to other devices by design of Apple.
JULIAN ACKERT: And that synchronization process does not affect the metadata that we're talking about here, which is the embedded metadata.
MR. MURPHY: When you say that a version of iOS software was listed in the software EXIF metadata field, what does that mean?
JULIAN ACKERT: That means the photo was not saved using the Photos application. using the Photos application.
MR. MURPHY: And what, if any, data sets did you use to come to that conclusion?
JULIAN ACKERT: I used all of the data sets that I collected or were collected for Amber, including mobile devices, tablets, laptops, et cetera.
MR. MURPHY: Michelle, can you, please, pull up Defendant's Exhibit 1671.
MR. MURPHY: Do you recognize this chart, Mr. Ackert?
JULIAN ACKERT: I do.
MR. MURPHY: What is it, without, yet, saying the contents, just, generally, what is it? 13. A This is a chart I created as part of my report.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, permission to publish Defendant's 671 as a demonstrative.
THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. DENNISON: No objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Allright. It will be published as a demonstrative.
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Ackert, can you describe, in detail, what this information on this cart is?
MR. MURPHY: And, Michelle, can you just stay at the top for a quick second? A little further up. Great.
JULIAN ACKERT: Thank you.
JULIAN ACKERT: This chart represents, for each of the items in Neumeister's report, which his demonstrative was based on, the page number of the item on his report and the items that I found on Ms. Heard's devices that did not indicate the software metadata field showing Photos, rather they indicated that they were the original software metadata field of iOS.
MR. MURPHY: Do you see the second column title “Neumeister Report Date Captured"?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, I do.
MR. MURPHY: What does the information in that column mean?
JULIAN ACKERT: This is a date/time metadata of the particular photo on Neumeister's report. So, for example, the first row, 23, the date/time captured - or the date captured is December 16th, 2015. The second row, 24, you see that the date/time is May 21st, 2016. Third row, May 21st, 2016. Fourth row, May 21st, 2016.
MR. MURPHY: Can you scroll to next page, please, Michelle.
MR. MURPHY: Please continue for the items on this page.
JULIAN ACKERT: The top row of this page, the one that came from Neumeister's report, page 30, shows December 16th, 2016. And then, finally, 32 shows March 23rd, 2013.
MR. MURPHY: Do you see --
MR. MURPHY: Can you scroll back to the top, please, Michelle.
MR. MURPHY: Do you seé the --
MR. MURPHY: All the way at the top, I'm sorry.
MR. MURPHY: The right-hand column of this chart?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, I do May 26, 2022
MR. MURPHY: And where it says "device ID and file name"?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes.
MR. MURPHY: Can you, please, explain what the information in that column means for each of the items identified from Mr. Neumeister’s demonstrative?
JULIAN ACKERT: So these are the evidence IDs, and evidence ID is the ID value I give to a particular piece of data that I collect; for example, a phone. ora laptop. And the matching file name found on that evidence ID that indicated the original version of this same photograph that Neumeister identified that did not show Photos in the software metadata, rather showed the iOS version in the metadata.
MR. MURPHY: What do the little As followed by numbers, backup, what.does that mean?
JULIAN ACKERT: Those are evidence IDs. Anything with an A number is the evidence ID of an actual device collected. Anything that starts with a backup and follows by another number is an iTunes backup.
MR. MURPHY: So what, if any -- what items in this right-hand column, based on the coding you have here, are iTunes backups?
JULIAN ACKERT: Only the ones that start with the word "backup." Even the ones that start with an A number are actually an iTunes — or an iOS backup in iCloud. So your phone can actually be backed up to iCloud, and those are coming from an iOS backup in iCloud. Everything else is coming from an actual physical device.
MR. MURPHY: Can you just take this down for a second, Michelle, and pull up 1675, Defendant's 1675. @Q And do you recognize this chart, Mr. Ackert?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes,I do.
MR. MURPHY: Without, yet, getting into the contents, can you, please, describe, generally, what it is.
JULIAN ACKERT: This is a chart that I prepared as a summary of my findings.
MR. MURPHY: Permission to publish Defendant's 1675 as a demonstrative, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. DENNISON: No objection.
THE COURT: Okay. 1675 will be 5° published as. demonstrative.
MR. MURPHY: Can you, please, describe, in more detail, what the three columns you can see in this chart represent?
JULIAN ACKERT: Sure. This starts to give some detail about the particular evidence ID, So, for example, A001 was an iPhone X of Amber's that was collected. A002 was an iPad of Amber's collected. A11, 12 and 13, slightly down, are three different laptops that were collected for Amber.
MR. MURPHY: And do you see the IDS evidence number column?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, I do.
MR. MURPHY: Do you see the source type column? ‘A_ Yes, I do.
MR. MURPHY: And the source details column?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, I do.
MR. MURPHY: Can you, please, describe what those columns mean.
JULIAN ACKERT: Generally, the IDS evidence number is the evidence number that we assign to a particular piece of evidence, and the type and details come from a description of that type of evidence, based upon the collection set.
MR. MURPHY: Michelle, can you, please, do a side-by-side of 1675 and 1671. Thank you. Q_ So, Mr. Ackert, can you, please, describe the relationship between these two 11.demonstrative exhibits?
JULIAN ACKERT: Certainly. If you look at 1671, the one on the left, you can see, in the fourth column, the different evidence IDs where I identified the original versions of those same pictures that Mr. Neumeister had specifically identified, and the sources of where they were identified. So if you look at the first one, for example, the picture, Neumeister referenced on page 24, or I guess that's the second one. There are equivalent versions or original versions of those that do not show the software EXIF metadata field of Photos, rather it shows the original iOS version on A001, which was Amber Heard's iPhone Xs, A002, which is Amber Heard's iPad Pro; scrolling on down through there, you see it on A001, which is Amber Heard's laptop, same with A0012 and 13. You can see this, again, with the next row that's visible at the very top, Neumeister identified a photograph on page 30, taken on December 16th, 2015. And he was concerned about the EXIF metadata of that showing the software version of Photos.
JULIAN ACKERT: The original versions of those were found, again, on A001, that's her iPhone X, A002, her iPad, and it's not surprising to me that I found all these on all the devices because that's how the Apple ecosystem works, it replicates your picture or synchronizes your pictures across your devices when you take them.
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Ackert --
MR. MURPHY: You can take this down, Michelle. Do you recall Mr. Neumeister's
MR. MURPHY: Do you recall Mr. Neumeister's testimony regarding what he claims of EXIF metadata modification?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes,I do. This is a completely hypothetical scenario. Mr. Neumeister never specified.any pictures with specificity that had EXIF metadata modification, and it's a hypothetical, in my opinion,
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Ackert, did you form any overall conclusions in this case? =A Yes, I did.
MR. MURPHY: And what were those?
JULIAN ACKERT: The images that were created in this case were included log files that allowed me to validate and verify the evidence collected. I validated and verified the log files of the evidence for which I found Mr. Neumeister's original photos that he had concerns about, specifically the ones that had iOS in the software metadata field. I validated that those came from devices that had - had been - had log files that were validated by me; in other words, they came from original evidence files, and most instances, they came from more than one file.
MR. MURPHY: Ms. Ackert, are the opinions you testified to today made to a reasonable degree of forensic certainty?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, they are,
MR. MURPHY: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Cross-examination.
MR. DENNISON: Thank you, Your Honor.
JULIAN ACKERT: Good morning.
MR. DENNISON: You've worked with opposing counsel's law firm, approximately, 20 times before?
JULIAN ACKERT: Give or take, yes.
MR. DENNISON: For more than a dozen years?
JULIAN ACKERT: Those 20 probably would have been spread out over more than a dozen years.
MR. DENNISON: Okay. As you sit here today, you cannot testify that all of the photographs produced by Ms. Heard are authentic originals, correct?
JULIAN ACKERT: I can testify to the ones that Mr. Neumeister identified with specificity.
MR. DENNISON: Right. But there are thousands of photographs provided that Mr. Neumeister didn't testify about, right?
JULIAN ACKERT: I have no opinions on any photographs that the opposing expert has no opinion on.
MR. DENNISON: Allright. My question to you, though, is, as you sit here today, can you testify that all the photographs produced by Ms. Heard are authentic originals?
JULIAN ACKERT: As I sit here today? I cannot opine to photographs that have not been presented to me that are not authentic originals.
MR. DENNISON: Allright. You'll agree with me that in some instances, Ms. Heard produced multiple versions of the same photograph, right?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes.
MR. DENNISON: You just talked about that, right? May 26, 2022
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes.
MR. DENNISON: Okay. And you'll agree with me that the EXIF data of some of the photos produced by Ms. Heard reflect the use of a photo editing application?
JULIAN ACKERT: No.
MR. DENNISON: No?
JULIAN ACKERT: I'll agree that they show the use of the Photos application, which is a sorting and editing application.
MR. DENNISON: Okay. So what you were quibbling with is that it will both sort and edit? 13. A _ That is correct.
MR. DENNISON: Okay. Are you prepared to swear, under oath, that each and every photograph provided by Ms. Heard and entered into evidence in this court is an authentic original?
JULIAN ACKERT: Based on the metadata that I have reviewed of the specific photographs I have reviewed, I can confirm that those are authentic original photographs. For the ones that Mr. Neumeister identified. Mr. Neumeister identified, I identified photos that were authentic originals.
MR. DENNISON: No, I'm asking you a broader question: 3. than that. There are multiple photographs that Ms. Heard provided that were entered into evidence in this court. Are you testifying that those are each authentic originals?
JULIAN ACKERT: Have no testimony or opinion on those because nobody's provided the opinion that they're not.
MR. DENNISON: Okay. Mr. Gibson, will you pull up Defendant's Exhibit 712 and Defendant's 713 next to one another. Your Honor, these have already been admitted, and I ask that we publish them to the jury.
THE COURT: Okay. If they're admitted, we can publish.
MR. DENNISON: Can you see this, sir?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, I can.
MR. DENNISON: You'll agree with me that those are different pictures?
JULIAN ACKERT: Visually, they look different to me, yes.
MR. DENNISON: Allright.
MR. DENNISON: We can take that down. Mr. Gibson, can you pull up Plaintiffs Exhibit 1308. This has not been admitted, Your Honor, and I propose to use it as a demonstrative.
THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. MURPHY: Not as a demonstrative, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Be identified and published to the jury as a demonstrative.
MR. DENNISON: Any objection to entering it into evidence?
MR. MURPHY: I would object it's cumulative, Your Honor. Actually, no. No objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: No objection. It's in evidence, then.
MR. DENNISON: 1308 is in evidence.
MR. DENNISON: 1308 is in evidence. Mr. Gibson, can you blow up the time, date, and file name.
MR. DENNISON: Sir, you just agreed with me that those two photos are different photos, correct?
JULIAN ACKERT: I agree that they were visually different, yes.
MR. DENNISON: Right. So they are two visually different photos that were created at the exact same hour, the exact same minute, the exact same second as each other, correct? And the metadata shows something else, too. They have the exact same file name, don't they, sir?
JULIAN ACKERT: That's what the date/time metadata
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes, but that's not embedded metadata. 17. Q Right. How would you have this jury decide which one is real?
JULIAN ACKERT: I think you would need to look at the software metadata field, which I haven't looked at. I don't recall if I looked at for this particular field, but I think that's what even May 26, 2022 Mr. Neumeister said, that you need to look at the software metadata field.
MR. DENNISON: But we have two photographs entered into evidence in this court that have the same identifying information but, n your view, look visually different, correct?
JULIAN ACKERT: I don't agree that they have the same identifying information. I don't see a software metadata field here.
MR. DENNISON: The identifying information includes the hour, minute, and second they were taken, these pictures were taken?
JULIAN ACKERT: I see that.
MR. DENNISON: No further questions.
THE COURT: All right. Just for the record, since we already have 712 and 713 in evidence as redacted, now this will be 712 and 713A. So 712A and 713A are now in evidence, just to keep the record clear. Redirect.
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Ackert, you just mentioned embedded metadata. What is that?
JULIAN ACKERT: Embedded metadata is metadata inside a file. I talked earlier about the date printed of a Word document. That's embedded into the file and that traverses with the file, whenever it goes.
MR. MURPHY: Based on all the photo metadata you have reviewed, do you have any reason to question the forensic authenticity of any photos Mr. Neumeister testified to, for which you were responding to?
JULIAN ACKERT: Can you repeat that question, please?
MR. MURPHY: Yeah. Based on all of the photo metadata you have reviewed, based on the photos Mr. Neumeister testified to, do you have any reason to question the forensic authenticity of those photos?
JULIAN ACKERT: I do not.
JULIAN ACKERT: They have not.
MR. MURPHY: And is it still your testimony that the opinions you testified to today are made with a reasonable degree of forensic certainty?
JULIAN ACKERT: Yes.
MR. MURPHY: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Sir, you can have a seat in the courtroom or you're free to go. All right. Did you want to approach just for a moment?
MS. BREDEHOFT: Thank you.