How do I get those FaceBook pics of my wife blowing a guy into evidence?

  So, there you are, just posting on FaceBook your favorite cat pictures, and telling people about the cool piece of lint that just fell out of your belly button, and you happen upon a picture of your wife deepthroating your best friend . . .
  Well . . . FaceBook doesn't really allow porn, but they are both tagged together, drunk and laughing in one picture, and in the next picture, you can only see him smiling, and her head is in his lap.  Good enough for a little court room tawdriness, eh?
  Best for you to tell your Georgia Divorce Attorney, or Georgia Criminal Defenses Attorney . . .
. . . that you have just read Smoot v. State, 2012 WL 1994711 (June 2012), and you can help him or her from failing to authenticate that lovely moment in their cheating lives.

(NO HYPERLINK YET, your website could link HERE)  :-)

  Printouts from Smoot's website, "ifshewontiwill.com"  (sorry, no longer on the web) were properly authenticated and ADMISSIBLE, but the printouts from (sorry again, it no longer these services) the Craigslist advertisements were INADMISSIBLE.  
(FYI.    all the Craigslist hookers . . . I mean escorts . . . are now advertising HERE though . . . although, you better make sure you read up on Smoot!

So . . . Why were the "ifshewontiwill" printouts ADMISSIBLE?
(1)
“As a general rule, a writing will not be admitted into evidence unless the offering party tenders proof of the authenticity or genuineness of the writing. There is no presumption of authenticity, and the burden of proof rests upon the proffering party to establish a prima facie case of genuineness.” 
(2)
 " . . . one of the investigating officers testified that he made the printouts of the website, which were “a fair and accurate representation of the actual things” that he personally viewed on the website as part of his investigation." 

(3)

"Moreover, the State presented circumstantial evidence that Smoot was the source of the website by introducing business cards found in her residence that were entitled “Adult Social Network,” listed the web address for the Ifshewontiwill website, and contained the statement “Created by Gold,” which Smoot admitted to police was her nickname."

and . . .

(4)

"Smoot also admitted to the officers that she was “familiar” with the website."

(so)

The court then stated: 

"Under these circumstances, the State sufficiently authenticated the printouts from the Ifshewontiwill website to create a prima facie case of genuineness."

 

AND . . . Why were the Craigslist printouts INADMISSIBLE?

(1)

"These printouts were introduced through the police lieutenant, but there was no testimony from her that the printouts fairly and accurately represented the contents of the website she personally viewed as part of her investigation."

(so)

and the court then stated:

"Accordingly, the State failed to elicit testimony sufficiently authenticating the printouts from Craigslist.org, and the trial court abused its discretion in admitting those printouts into evidence."

.

.

.

.

Draw your own conclusions, and make sure your business cards fit the Smoot Rule, and have the following ambiguous content:

 “Adult Social Network.” 

 “True Freaks ONLY!!!!,” 

“Ready to Have Some Fun,”

 “HBIC/CEO” of “All You Need Entertainment.”

“10–20 Entertainers always available” 

and “Appointments taken 24/7.”

AND OH!!! Don't forget to take the weed out of your closed wooden box in your master bathroom where you will be caught when the police raid your personal residence.

(Smoot did get convicted for possession of marijuana)