Speaking for the United States, any document or other exhibit is only admitted into evidence when a witness gets on the stand and testifies under oath as to what the document is. So if someone wants a court to believe that, say, a computer log is authentic, they have to produce a witness to testify about the authenticity. This is where anti tampering measures can be discussed, if relevant.

That witness is then subject to cross examination, which can reveal any holes or gaps. Cross examination can also be used to impeach the credibility of the witness themself.

Once an exhibit is admitted into evidence, the trier of fact, either a judge or jury, will assign a credibility level to it based on the sum total of evidence presented and their own common sense.

It sounds like she’s saying that regardless of how culpable she may have been, she should be covered by one of the sweetheart immunity deals that the feds made with Epstein.

What that actually looked like: