A Nantucket, Massachusetts decide ordered the three of them to show the cellphone over so protection specialists might look at it.
Spacey’s attorneys claimed in a listening to earlier this month that proof that might exonerate the 59-year-old actor was deleted from the cellphone earlier than it was turned over to prosecutors.
“(The accuser) and his family have no memory of seeing the subject phone after December 2017, when that phone was delivered to the Commonwealth,” household legal professional Mitchell Garabedian wrote in court docket paperwork. “(The accuser) and his family have searched all the places where such a phone may have been stored. They have not found the phone.”
CNN just isn’t naming Spacey’s accuser as a result of he’s an alleged sexual assault sufferer.
Spacey is accused of indecent assault and battery for allegedly groping an 18-year-old busboy in July 2016 on the Membership Automotive bar on the island of Nantucket.
In the course of the alleged assault, the accuser despatched textual content messages on his cellphone, together with a less-than-one-second-long video, to his girlfriend.
Prosecutors informed Choose Thomas Barrett final month they obtained a replica of information from the cellphone, however the system was then returned.
A CD containing the information obtained from the cellphone was given to protection attorneys, however they are saying that was not adequate.
“Access to the underlying databases is necessary to perform a proper analysis, including whether messages may have been deleted or to attempt recovery of deleted data,” protection skilled Sankara Shanmugam wrote in an affidavit.
Spacey’s attorneys argued display screen pictures and a report by police depart no query proof was deleted, and they need to be allowed to attempt to get well it.
“He and or his mother deleted the exculpatory texts that were on the phone,” protection legal professional Alan Jackson stated in a listening to this month. “They deleted information that they didn’t want the police to have, they deleted information they didn’t want us to have.”
Garabedian wrote in as we speak’s submitting that police notes say the cellphone was returned to the accuser’s father, however “he has no memory of receiving his son’s phone from the police.”
Because the cellphone can’t be discovered, Garabedian says they’re looking for backups of what was on it.
“Understanding the significance of this order, (the accuser) and his family are in the process of engaging a digital forensic expert to search for likely backups of (the accuser’s) 2015 phone.”
In response to Garabedian’s submitting, Choose Barrett prolonged the deadline for turning the cellphone over till July 8.
If the cellphone just isn’t discovered by then, the accuser, his mom and legal professional should seem in court docket to testify about its whereabouts.