allow a person to perform a demonstration on a computer system instead of a printout if such
demonstration has been performed by a person who has authenticated such demonstration
by means of admissible evidence.
(9) Evidence authenticating a printout or a demonstration must be evidence of –
(a) the steps that have been taken to create the printout;
(b) the software that has been used to create the printout or demonstration;
(c) if the steps referred to in paragraph (a), require any special expertise, the
nature of the qualifications or experience of the person who performed those
steps;
(d) particulars of any alterations made in order to create such printout or demonstration and if no such alteration has been made, a statement to that effect;
and
(e) any other fact that is relevant in order to demonstrate that the evidence is
reliable and is what it purports to be.
(10) If any matter referred to in subsection (9) is not admitted by all parties in the
proceedings in question, the party or person tendering the evidence in question, bears the
burden of proof of all the facts referred to in that subsection.
(11) It is presumed, unless admissible evidence to the contrary is provided, that
software operates correctly.
(12) No expert evidence is required to prove the operation or functionality of software that is commonly used on personal computers or other computational devices that are
commonly used by persons that are not experts in the field of computer science or a related
field.
26