Digital Evidence (Texts, DMs, Metadata) in Criminal Sexual Conduct Investigations in Minnesota

In today’s world, almost every relationship and interaction leaves a digital trail. From text messages and social media DMs to photos, emails, and location data, electronic communication has become a key part of Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) investigations in Minnesota.

Police and prosecutors increasingly rely on digital evidence to build or support sexual assault cases — sometimes as their strongest proof, and sometimes as their weakest link.

But digital evidence can be complex. Messages can be taken out of context, metadata can be misunderstood, and data can even be altered or deleted. Understanding how this evidence is collected, interpreted, and challenged is crucial for anyone accused of a sex crime.

This guide explains how digital evidence works in CSC investigations, what rights defendants have, and how experienced lawyers at Martine Law use legal strategy to protect clients’ rights.

What Counts as Digital Evidence?

Digital evidence includes any electronic data that investigators use to support or refute allegations. In Minnesota CSC cases, it often comes from:

• Text messages and call logs
• Social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X, etc.)
• Direct messages (DMs) and private chats
• Emails
• Photos and videos
• Metadata (hidden data such as timestamps, GPS coordinates, and file origins)
• Search history and internet activity
• Cloud backups and deleted files
• Smartphone and smartwatch data, including location and movement history

Investigators often view these sources as objective, but context matters. A single screenshot or message thread rarely tells the full story.

Why Digital Evidence Matters in CSC Cases

Digital evidence plays a major role in sexual assault cases because these cases often come down to conflicting stories about what happened and whether consent existed.

Prosecutors use digital evidence to:

• Corroborate the accuser’s account.
• Show communication before or after the alleged incident.
• Establish motive, intent, or consciousness of guilt (such as apologies, deletions, or avoidance).

Defense attorneys use the same evidence to:

• Demonstrate consent or inconsistencies.
• Show friendly or affectionate communication before or after the incident.
• Prove the accuser’s bias, motive to lie, or changes in story.
• Challenge the authenticity or accuracy of messages and timestamps.

In short, the same piece of data can be interpreted in opposite ways — which makes skilled legal analysis critical.

How Police Collect Digital Evidence

1. Device Seizure and Search Warrants

Police may seize phones, computers, or tablets during an investigation. To legally search their contents, they usually need a search warrant under the Fourth Amendment.

The warrant must specifically describe what data they can access — such as messages between certain dates, photos, or location history.

2. Subpoenas to Service Providers

Investigators often subpoena records from cell carriers, social media companies, or email providers. For example:

• Facebook and Snapchat can provide archived messages and metadata.
• Google can provide Gmail messages and location history.
• Apple can provide iCloud backups or device registration data.

3. Forensic Data Extraction

Law enforcement uses forensic tools (like Cellebrite or GrayKey) to extract deleted files, images, and app data.

4. Metadata Analysis

Metadata — the hidden information stored within a file — can reveal when and where a photo or message was created, edited, or sent.

This can be powerful evidence, but it can also be misleading. For instance, metadata may change when a file is copied or sent through another platform.

Common Types of Digital Evidence in CSC Investigations

1. Text Messages and DMs

These are often the most significant pieces of evidence. Prosecutors may use texts to argue:

• There was an admission of guilt (“I’m sorry for what happened”).
• The defendant knew the act was wrong.
• The victim expressed fear or lack of consent.

However, defense lawyers can often point to other messages that tell a different story — such as mutual flirtation, ongoing communication, or expressions of affection after the alleged incident.

2. Social Media Activity

Posts, comments, and private messages can be used to show relationship history, character, or state of mind.

For example, if the complainant continued interacting positively with the accused after the alleged assault, that can undermine claims of trauma or fear.

3. Photos and Videos

Photos taken before, during, or after an encounter can support or contradict claims about intoxication, location, or consent. But photos can also be misinterpreted, altered, or lack reliable timestamps.

4. GPS and Location Data

Phones constantly record GPS data through apps and networks. Location history can:

• Confirm or disprove the defendant’s whereabouts.
• Establish whether the accused and accuser were together.
• Show movement patterns inconsistent with testimony.

5. Metadata

Metadata includes technical details like:

• When a message was sent.
• What device was used.
• Where the device was located.
• When a file was created, modified, or deleted.

While metadata can verify authenticity, it’s not foolproof — even simple actions like forwarding a photo can change metadata values.

Issues with Reliability and Interpretation

Digital evidence may seem objective, but it often isn’t. Common problems include:

• Context errors: Messages taken out of sequence or misread without full threads.
• Deleted or missing data: Incomplete records can create misleading impressions.
• Altered timestamps: Time zone differences or app glitches can change when a message appears to have been sent.
• Partial screenshots: Cherry-picked images can hide important context.
• Third-party access: Shared devices or accounts may make it unclear who sent a message.

Experienced defense lawyers know how to expose these weaknesses and prevent juries from being misled by incomplete or inaccurate data.

How Prosecutors Use Digital Evidence in CSC Trials

During trial, prosecutors often use digital evidence to:

• Show communications between the parties leading up to the alleged incident.
• Highlight messages expressing fear, anger, or regret by the accuser.
• Present “apology” texts as proof of guilt or consciousness of wrongdoing.
• Use metadata to argue the defendant’s phone was present at the crime scene.

But what looks like guilt can often be explained by emotion, confusion, or context. For example:

• An “I’m sorry” text may express empathy, not guilt.
• Deleted messages may indicate embarrassment or privacy concerns, not concealment.
• A GPS record may show presence at a location, but not the nature of what happened there.

How Defense Attorneys Challenge Digital Evidence

A skilled Minneapolis criminal defense attorney can challenge digital evidence through technical analysis and legal argument.

1. Authenticity Challenges

The defense can demand proof that the evidence is genuine — that the defendant actually sent the message and that it hasn’t been altered.

2. Chain of Custody Issues

If police mishandled data or extracted it improperly, the defense can argue that the evidence is unreliable and should be excluded.

3. Fourth Amendment Violations

If the data was obtained without a valid warrant or beyond the warrant’s scope, the defense can move to suppress it.

4. Expert Analysis

Digital forensics experts can analyze metadata, recovery processes, and device logs to expose inconsistencies.

5. Contextual Evidence

The defense can present the full conversation, showing that the messages were mutual, playful, or unrelated to coercion.

6. Alternate Explanations

When multiple people have access to an account or phone, the defense can argue that someone else sent or deleted messages.

Digital Evidence and Consent

In many CSC cases, digital communications before and after the alleged act are central to the question of consent.

Messages may show:

• Mutual flirting or planning to meet.
• Expressions of consent or agreement.
• Friendly contact after the incident (which can contradict claims of trauma).
• Contradictory statements by the accuser to different people.

A Minneapolis sex crimes lawyer can use this evidence to build a narrative of consent, misunderstanding, or fabrication — especially when physical evidence is weak.

Privacy and Search Rights in Minnesota

Defendants still have strong privacy rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution.

• Police usually need a specific search warrant to access a person’s phone, computer, or digital accounts.
• Warrants must be supported by probable cause and describe the items to be seized.
• Warrants that are too broad (for example, “all messages on the device”) can be challenged as unconstitutional.
• Evidence obtained without a valid warrant may be suppressed under the exclusionary rule.

Courts are increasingly scrutinizing digital searches to protect individuals’ privacy, especially as phones hold vast amounts of personal data.

Preservation of Digital Evidence

If you are accused of CSC, do not delete or alter your messages or accounts. Doing so can appear as obstruction or consciousness of guilt.

Instead:

• Preserve all communications related to the accuser.
• Back up your data securely.
• Provide your attorney with full access for review.
• Do not contact the accuser directly, even to clarify context.

Your attorney can safely obtain, store, and use the data to build your defense.

How Martine Law Uses Digital Evidence in Defense

At Martine Law, we understand that digital evidence often holds the truth — both for and against the accused. Our defense strategy typically includes:

1. Full forensic review of phones, messages, and cloud accounts.
2. Expert analysis of metadata and timestamps.
3. Subpoenas for complete message histories (not selective screenshots).
4. Legal motions to exclude unlawfully obtained or misleading data.
5. Contextual presentation to the jury to explain tone, humor, or consent.

Our attorneys have extensive experience cross-examining digital forensics experts and exposing weaknesses in the state’s technological evidence.

Key Takeaways

• Digital evidence in CSC cases includes texts, DMs, photos, metadata, and online activity.
• Police must obtain valid warrants to seize and search digital data.
• Prosecutors use digital evidence to show lack of consent, consciousness of guilt, or intent.
• Defense attorneys use it to show consent, inconsistencies, and false allegations.
• Digital data can be misleading, incomplete, or taken out of context — skilled legal defense is essential to interpret it correctly.

Contact Martine Law

If you are under investigation or charged with Criminal Sexual Conduct in Minnesota, and digital evidence is part of the case, you need a defense team that understands both the law and the technology.

At Martine Law, our attorneys have successfully defended clients in complex CSC cases involving texts, social media, and metadata. We know how to challenge flawed digital forensics and present the full picture.

Contact us today for a confidential consultation with a defense attorney who will protect your rights and your future.