Authenticity on trial: How Magnet Verify helps prosecutors admit digital media and defeat deepfake defenses

In an era where a single image or video clip can make or break a prosecution, the authenticity of media evidence has never been more crucial. As deepfakes and synthetic content become more sophisticated and accessible, prosecutors face mounting challenges not only in presenting compelling digital evidence but also in defending its integrity in court. Magnet Verify, a tool developed by Magnet Forensics, helps meet that challenge head-on. 

Introducing Magnet Verify 

Magnet Verify is a media authentication tool that allows examiners to confidently and reliably inspect media files, such as images and videos, to determine whether they have been altered, manipulated, or synthetically created (deepfaked) to provide the necessary foundation for authentication required by the rules of evidence. 

Verifying Authenticity Before It’s Challenged 

Magnet Verify analyzes each media file for signs of modification. The tool can detect whether a file is camera-original or has been altered post-capture, which is crucial when establishing that a photo or video accurately represents its content, all without relying on the file’s metadata values (that can be easily changed). Verify doesn’t stop there: the tool also identifies metadata inconsistencies and traces the history of file edits, providing prosecutors with a timeline of how a piece of evidence was created, altered, and ultimately obtained. Magnet Verify relies on a proven approach using the internal structure of the media itself and the largest reference library of media encoding in the world to provide verifiable insight into file authenticity, creation, and editing history. Verify’s process helps investigators and prosecutors challenge the common misconception that examining a file’s metadata alone is sufficient to authenticate the underlying media.  

Defeating Claims of Deepfakes and Synthetic Media 

A growing number of criminal defendants are now raising challenges that media evidence has been fabricated, particularly in child exploitation, sexual assault, and public corruption cases. For example, in one instance a defendant claimed the video capturing the defendant near the crime scene was synthetic. The defense’s theory was that since the entire video was faked and made up, the issue was the underlying authenticity and did not just go to weight for the trier of fact to consider. In that case, the prosecution was forced to respond to a false claim and argue the admissibility with the court.   

Often these claims often invoke concerns about deepfakes, AI-generated content, or synthetic alterations. Magnet Verify quantifiably distinguishes authentic media from these fabrications, utilizing forensic indicators to not only establish when an image or video is likely to have been artificially generated, but to also prove that an original piece of evidence is “real”. For prosecutors, this means you can not only present robust media evidence but also rebut anticipated claims that “it’s not real.” 

Using Magnet Verify Offensively in Pre-Trial Strategy 

Magnet Verify is not just a reactive tool; a prosecutor may deploy Verify’s results offensively through strategic pre-trial motions. Magnet Verify’s training course specifically prepares digital forensic examiners to author reports and give accurate, meaningful, testimony in an easy-to-understand manner for motions just like these. In cases where the defense may attempt to introduce doubt about the authenticity of media evidence, prosecutors can use Magnet Verify findings to support motions in limine requesting a court bar speculative or unsupported claims involving deepfakes, synthetic media, or manipulation. By proactively presenting forensic validation that a video or image is camera-original and unaltered, prosecutors can argue that the court should preclude the defense from raising authenticity challenges without a proper evidentiary foundation. Additionally, suppose a defense expert intends to testify that the media has been altered or fabricated without applying a scientifically valid methodology. In that case, the prosecutor can use the forensic examiner’s testimony and Verify’s results as a basis for a Daubert challenge, seeking to exclude the expert’s testimony as unreliable. This approach helps streamline the trial, insulate the jury from disinformation, and reinforce the reliability of the prosecution’s evidence from the outset. 

Establishing Chain of Custody and Device Attribution 

Magnet Verify also tracks the source of media files. By identifying the camera or device that created the file and tracking its movement between systems, the tool can provide valuable insights into establishing a proper chain of custody. These insights help establish a reliable link between the defendant and the evidence, and bolsters arguments for both admissibility and attribution. 

Supporting Legal Admissibility with Forensic Transparency 

Magnet Verify doesn’t just offer conclusions; it provides transparency. Prosecutors may use Verify’s findings to explain to courts and juries how the authenticity of media was evaluated, without requiring prosecutors to become digital forensics experts themselves. The underlying methodology can be clearly articulated through expert testimony, laying a solid foundation for admission under evidentiary rules like Federal Rule of Evidence 901(b)(9) (system or process producing reliable results). 

Conclusion 

As synthetic media becomes more sophisticated, prosecutors must prepare not only to present compelling digital evidence but also to defend its authenticity. Magnet Verify equips examiners, investigators, and prosecutors with the tools and forensic clarity needed to do both. Whether you’re admitting a critical video or preemptively addressing claims of digital fabrication, Magnet Verify helps keep the focus on the facts and the truth.