Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator (CHFI v10) — Question 299

During an ongoing cybercrime investigation, a non-expert witness, who is an employee of the organization, testifies to observing unusual computer activity. Simultaneously, an expert witness introduces a record of the regularly conducted activity of the organization. The record was kept near the incident’s time adept as part of the regular activity. It reveals a similar observation as the non-expert witness. How would the Federal Rules of Evidence classify and treat these testimonies in this scenario?

Answer options

• A. The lay witness testimony is inadmissible hearsay under Rule 801. but the record is admissible under Rule 803(6)
• B. Both testimonies are admissible; the lay witness testimony is under Rule 701, and the record is under Rule 803(6)
• C. Both testimonies are inadmissible; the lay witness testimony is hearsay under Rule 801, and the record is hearsay under Rule 803(6)
• D. The lay witness testimony is admissible under Rule 701, but the record is inadmissible hearsay under Rule 803(6)

Correct answer: B

Explanation

The lay witness testimony is admissible under Rule 701 as it is based on the witness's personal observations, while the expert's record is admissible under Rule 803(6) as a business record. Options A, C, and D incorrectly classify either the lay witness testimony or the record as inadmissible, which does not align with the rules governing admissibility.