Chain of custody

Do you think the president doesn't have what we do? As you'll see, some of the videos have

chain of custody numbers on them.

the more you know.

So they're sharing information that has no attribution.

Others are just doing it for clicks and to get you enraged.

Do you think the president doesn't have what we do? As you'll see,

some of the videos have chain of custody numbers on them.

The more you know.

If he's seen bodies, let's go to where those bodies are.

If those bodies aren't in the same place, there definitely is a chain of custody to where the bodies are.

If there was a craft, there's a chain of custody to where it is.

Even if it happened 20 years ago for Jay Stratton, there's still some chain of custody.

And if there isn't, that's what we should be investigating as wrongdoing within the government.

So it shouldn't just be Avi Loeb looking into, hey, is there really a blue alien somewhere? It should be, was there government wrongdoing as well? So is the government wrongdoing and the coverup not part of what this committee is allowed to investigate? Because if they can't investigate that, how are you supposed to go up against the government that's covering it up, especially working within it?

I wanna know where the information and the videos all came from, where they reside now.

Again, there's chains of custody with all evidence in any investigation that has to do with the government.

However, with growing experience over several cases, the expert becomes skilled in handling such situations and becomes an expert in the experience of delivering expert testimony.

Lawyers often try to put the expert witness who has analyzed the evidence in a spot by interrogating about its chain of custody.

Chain of custody is an important factor for ensuring the admissibility of evidence in the court.

We have already discussed how evidence is processed from its recognition to laboratory analysis.

And between these stages, the evidence is not in the possession of a single person, like if it gets transferred from the investigator to the laboratory.

In the laboratory, this revolver is sent to the fingerprints division, then to the biology and serology division, and at last to the ballistics division.

This change in custody needs to be documented each time the evidence is transferred from one person to another.

This process of documented transfer of evidence from one person to another is called chain of custody.

She held the backup tapes to her chest like proprietary gold.

"Chain of custody," she insisted.

"No city-issue team can review this until after demolition orders signed.

I won't have another media leak, Elias." "That's not how you find out what happened to Karim or anyone else." My voice was harsher than intended.

Other documents have surfaced over the years claiming to be minutes or memos from MJ-12, but none have survived with credible provenance.

In each case, investigators find either that the documents are simple photocopies of earlier fakes, that they were created by individuals known to be UFO enthusiasts, or that they simply lack any traceable chain of custody.

The pattern is consistent.

A claim appears, it passes through a handful of online forums, then fades without concrete archival backing.

Comparing MJ-12 to other alleged clandestine groups like MKUltra or CIA advisory panels is revealing those organizations also lacked a formal record at first, but as classified files were eventually declassified and researchers examined them, evidence emerged that the programs indeed existed and had a documented history.

In contrast, No credible documents or witnesses have ever surfaced for MJ-12 despite decades of intensive searching.

Chain of Custody questions are critical because the only copies we know of were once owned by an individual ufologist who claimed to receive them from an anonymous source in 1984.

There is no trace of how the original drafts moved through any official system, nor documentation proving that these papers survived a government archive's stringent retention policy.

But again, without independent verification from third parties—no one else has analyzed those same frames and corroborated the anomalies—these claims remain speculative.

A critical point to note is the chain of custody for all of Meier’s material.

Most items have only passed through his own network before reaching scholars.

When a single person is responsible for both creating and preserving evidence, that increases the chance that the evidence could be manipulated or fabricated at will.

Storytelling, self-promotion, and manipulation of material all combine in ways that seem almost formulaic.

Those patterns give us a framework to assess similar cases.

Look for replication potential, chain of custody, independent analysis, and consistency across multiple types of evidence.

Applying that framework to Meyer's portfolio reveals that while some items could pass superficial checks, the deeper, more technical examinations repeatedly return to conventional explanations.

All that are going to be problematic for the prosecution.

They're going to have to answer and they're going to have to talk about the chain of custody.

The state wants you to assume that whatever was written on this bag was written that night.

It would ask you to assume that it was just one person that wrote it.

Two separate photos.

So this idea that evidence gets collected would be nice to think that it always has a nice orderly process and everything goes smoothly.

But what's getting tested is only as good as the way it's collected, the way that it's handled, the chain of custody.

And I would say to you, when you see the evidence in this case and you listen, I think you're going to have questions about how things were handled.

That's an episode that will be coming up later on today.

The discovery request filed by Kohberger's public defender, Ann Taylor, in the Second Judicial Court in Latok County seeks a series of DNA-related evidence, information about all involved laboratories, profile databases, lab technicians, and chain of custody details is included in the request.

And how many times have I talked about chain of custody and how important it is? And you're going to see that play out right here.

If the chain of custody was broken at any point, it's not going to be admissible evidence.

Of course, the judge can, you know, wiggle around and do what she wants.

But for the most part, if you have something as far as evidence and the chain of custody has been broken, a lot of times judges are not going to allow that evidence to be admitted.

So I'm very interested to see the chain of custody here, considering they sent it out to multiple labs.

But either way, we're going to be here every step of the way, following along with the Brian Kohberger investigation and the Brian Kohberger trial.

Why does ITAD certification even matter?

It is full chain of custody, right? So you go through a vetting process.

If it's with R2-V3, Nade, any of those ISOs, You're regularly going through your internal management systems, and then you're performing those management systems through and throughout, and you're getting audited on that to make sure you're keeping compliant with that.

You have verification tests on top of that.

So that's all about data bearing now.

We're taking a look at all loose drives, all data bearing devices such as laptops, phones, desktops, et cetera, and having a – uh chain of custody that reads the moment we picked up the moment it was sanitized or destroyed or sold at the end of sanitation so that's very important to have for the client so we say hey we're picking it up we are seeing the liability for you guys why do you want to hold on to that liability i've seen Not corporations, but government bodies that use pretty much like a GovDeals and they use their own surplus.

And they're reselling their devices there.

I said, you're still putting a liability because your employees are employed by you.