Electronic evidence authenticated by pictures, greetings, and stated interests

In previous posts, I have attempted to list what courts look for when authenticating digital evidence. A recent California case almost adds a new one to the list. I may be reading too much into the opinion, but it's a worthwhile argument nonetheless.

The issue concerned authentication of a printed MySpace profile. People v. Valdez, 201 Cal. App. 4th 1429  (2011). It contained the following that was attributable to the alleged author: his pictures, greetings addressing him by name or relation, and stated interest in gangs and a picture of him "forming a gang signal with his right hand."

The profile was used to tie the defendant to gang activity, and the relevant data had been posted more than a year before the crime, making it inconceivable that anyone would have fabricated the information that early. Thus, implicit in this decision is a rule that electronic evidence can be authenticated if it appears that the supposed author has continued to update the profile. If they had not authored certain data on the page, they obviously would have deleted those postings (assuming, of course, that they saw them).