SMS 25 Years Old Today

SMS 25 Years Old Today

Today, SMS (short message service) text messaging cellebrates its birthday. The service was technically created in 1985, however the use of this communications technological advantage containing the message "Happy Christmas" sent in the UK over the Vodafone network was not seen until the first was message was transmitted on 3rd December 1992.

The ubiquitous use of SMS generated global revenues, researched has shown, over $150 billion for 2009 and is forecast to reach $233 billion by the end of 2014, according to Sheri Wells of SMS Media Group.

SMS texting is used by the rich and famous, film stars, singers to the general populus and it is hard to think of anywhere in the world that hasn't used the SMS service. But there are Countries that do not have SMS currently. Do you know the names of those countries and what are their population sizes?

SMS Text Messages - Hearsay Evidence

SMS Text Messages - Hearsay Evidence

.

C2247 / R v Leonard 2009

YEAR OF CASE: 2009

CITATION: [2009] EWCA Crim 1251

COURT: Court of Appeal

.

SUMMARY:

Large quantities of various types of Class A drugs and cash were found in L's bedsit and on his person during a search by police.

.

At trial for possession of class A drugs with intent to supply, the prosecution argued that L was a street dealer and those drugs found had been his 'stock pile'. The defence argued that the drugs were for his personal use and that he was not a dealer but he had the large amount that was found because he intended to share them with his girlfriend.

.

The prosecution wished to admit two text messages as evidence to support its case. Both were from different people, one to compliment the 'gear', the other to complain about it. The defence argued that the text messages were inadmissible hearsay. The judge rejected the argument and admitted them as evidence of bad character as opposed to hearsay.

.

L was convicted and appealed arguing that the judge had been wrong in law.

.

Held:

Appeal dismissed. Convictions upheld. The text messages were hearsay evidence and not evidence of bad character. They fell in the scope of section 114 and 115 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and had to for the following reasons;

.

(i) they had not been made in oral evidence,

(ii) they were statements of fact or opinion within the meaning of section 115(2) of the 2003 Act,

(iii) the reason for the evidence being admitted was to establish the matters stated in the texts to try to prove that L had supplied the drugs to the senders of the texts, and

(iv) each message was designed to make the person in receipt of them believe the matters stated in them as required by section 115(3).

.

Once it is established that the texts are hearsay they then fall to be analysed as to whether they meet the statutory requirements regarding admission. The only basis upon which they could be admitted would be under section 114(1)(d); that it was in the interests of justice to do so. To ascertain whether that is the case, regard must then be had to the 9 propositions in section 114(2) and as they fail to meet some or all of those criteria, they may be hearsay, but they are inadmissible hearsay evidence. Despite this there was still a very strong case against L without them and their admission had not tainted the rest of the trial.

.

Note:

In this instance the senders of the text messages were never identified. If the authors can be identified then the text messages may become admissible where the authors can be potential witnesses. Thus allowing the evidence to be tested by way of cross-examination with any requisite measures in place, for example special measures under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to alleviate such issues as fear.

.

http://www.forensicfocus.com/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=4567

Conflicts Call Records & SMS Delivery Dates

Conflicts Call Records & SMS Delivery Dates

One of the topics dealt with on my training courses just last week is getting examiners to appreciate the relevance of date and time stamps for received SMS text messages. Essentially, it should not be assumed as fact that a text message date and time stamp and call record date and time stamp for the SMS reflect the actual date and time of receipt by a mobile telephone.

The warning during training is worth raising, but there is nothing better that having a reminder about this matter. I have had two reminders of the fact that delayed text messages can occur. Over the last couple of days, Two text messages that were sent to me arrived yesterday and today. The text that was received yesterday 08/10/07 was sent on the 05/10/07. The text received today 09/10/07 was sent on the 04/10/07. Note how the older dated of the two text messages arrived later.

There may be some who might argue that:

1) 7F106F3C was full up and 7F106F43 threshold was exceeded, thus preventing texts being received? I can confirm 7F106F3C wasn't full and there is plenty of memory for incoming texts, thus 7F106F43 would not have been invoked.

2) That my mobile 'phone inbox was full up? I can confirm that it wasn't and there is plenty of memory available for incoming texts.

3) That my phone had been switched off all that time? I can confirm my mobile 'phone has been switch ON, on most occasions, except at night and for re-charging. Additionally, I have been receiving texts from others.

4) That the mobile had or has been in a poor service coverage areas? No this would not be correct because on the 04/10/07 I was right by the mobile operator's mast from which my mobile receives service and usually the location for my mobile is in a good coverage service area.

This topic raises important matters regarding mobile telephone evidence in criminal proceedings:

A) That the date and time in an SMS text message is the SMSC date and time that received the sent text message from its subscriber. There are some, not many, mobile telephones that do identify a date and time for the text folder when the message was received, but that is not the text message itself. Also the folder date and time is as accurate as the user set the clock on the mobile 'phone. The latter folder issue maybe a moot point though for where the text message is deleted and later to be recovered, the mobile telephone folder or its date and time stamp are not recovered.

B) That the call records reflect the charging parameters date and time, not necessarily the delivery date and time of an SMS text message. Therefore, this can create conflict between the call records dates and time and SMS delivery dates and times.

C) In criminal proceedings, we largely deal with historical data and therefore the subscriber of an mobile telephone account may receive a message that can be some time after the date it was sent and the message maybe subsequently saved or deleted. However it may also be the case that the subscriber may not remember down the line whether a particular text was received late or not.

To overcome this problem and for corroborative purposes, naturally, call record data that identifies details of a received SMS text message should include the network operator's record confirming receipt of the text message including date and time stamp. The network receipt arises as the mobile 'phone is required to provide confirmation of the message delivered to it. You might think this is analogous to a "Registered Post" letter requiring the addressee to sign having taken taking delivery of it.

Disappearing SMS Text Messages

Disappearing SMS Text Messages

SMS (short message service) text messages are convienent way to communicate and the amount of texts sent each year runs into billions, proving that this service in the wireless world of mobile telephones is highly popular.

There are a number of classes of SMS messages, but the class of message relevant to this discussion is "Class 0 (flash message)", which can add difficulties to an examiner's investigation and evidence. Text messages that are stored and then deleted can be recovered, provided they have not been overwritten.

Flash messages though are a different beast altogether, because when sent the recipient sees the message on the handset screen without the message having been lodged at first instance in the handset inbox or SIM (ef) 7F106F42.

A simple constructed message and assignment can be:

[Flash] [Recipient Number] [Message]

The flash message once received can be deleted from the screen or made to disappear from the screen and it is possible to generate messages in such away that any content of importance may not be recoverable.

Deleted SMS text messages

Deleted SMS text messages

GSM 11.11 (ETSI TS 100 977) is a Standard containing mandatory and optional requirements relevant to Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) cards. An optional service that an Operator may provide to a subscriber of its services is Short Message Service (SMS) text messaging. The requirements relating to storing sent and received SMS text messages, in the user memory area of the SIM card, are identified at GSM 11.11 cl10.5.3. When a message that is received and is subsequently deleted by the user of the SIM, the user can no longer gain access to that data. The details about a particular SMS message that has been deleted are removed from the SIM's memory table thus the mobile telephone will no longer display the SIM details of that message to the user.

Although the details of the SMS text message are no longer accessible by the user, GSM 11.11 makes it clear the physical data relating to the entire text message may still be recorded on the card. GSM 11.11 procedure for "Erasure" of text messages states:

GSM 11.11 cl 11.5.2
"Erasure: The ME will select in the SIM the message area to be erased. Depending on the MMI, the message may be read before the area is marked as "free". After performing the updating procedure with EFSMS, the memory allocated to this short message in the SIM is made available for a new incoming message. The memory of the SIM may still contain the old message until a new message is stored in this area."

Using specialist examination tools it is therefore possible to recover erased (deleted) SMS text messages from a SIM card. Where a previously deleted message has been over-written by either new data allocated to the memory area previously occupied by the deleted data or the handset automatically over-writes as a function of its operating procedure (usually over-writes with 000000's) the erased (deleted) data in the SIM are no longer recoverable. Hopefully this
information will assist if you are asked is it possible can deleted text messages be recovered, and, if not recoverable, why not?

http://www.filebucket.net/files/1596_ooy39/SMS%20Text%20Messages.pdf

Mobile Telephone Evidence

Code and Data go hand in hand

Examiners are familiar with the fact that from time to time found appended to SMS text messages there appears unintelligible code that cannot be read in context with the user's message itself. Such code as @@@ or /./@@ and so on may raise the notion that the SIM reader has not decoded the message correctly. On the contrary, the SIM reader is most likely to have done its job. The assignment of code being added to the data is so that the mobile telephone knows what to do with a message next time it reads it. The cause behind this is fairly straightforward. Phase 2+ handsets (GSM Release 98 onwards) adopted UCS2 (Universal Character Set 2) that allowed highlights to be added to or with data. For instance, italics or colours and so on. Most GSM SIMs' are programmed with GSM Default Alphabet and not UCS2. To corroborate finding code with data, following a SIM read, may require viewing the message through the handset.