A thing or matter is sufficiently authenticated to be admissible in evidence if the authenticating evidence submitted to the trial court is sufficient -- strong enough -- to permit a reasonable jury or reasonable trier of fact to conclude that the proffered thing or matter is authentic, that the proffered thing or matter is what its proponent claims it is.

United States v. Beaver, 524 F.2d 963, 966 (5th Cir. 1975) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of testimony about accused's prior counterfeit currency transactions where "it was introduced to show [accused's] knowledge that the bill he passed was counterfeit.").Evidence of a criminal or wrongful act apart from the act that at issue at trial Is not barred by the prohibition against circumstantial use of character if intent, knowledge, mistake, or accident is a legally-material factual issue, the opposing party suggests the non-existence of knowledge or urges mistake or accident as a defense, and evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is offered to prove the knowledge or the absence of mistake or accident by a criminal defendant or other person.

Cf. Outley v. City of New York, 837 F.2d 587, 591-594 (2d Cir. 1988) (holding, in plaintiff's action against police officers for police brutality, that evidence of accused's litigiousness or history of bringing lawsuits against the police was inadmissible where it was not offered to show bias).A person's other crimes, wrongs, or acts are not barred by the character rule either if they are not offered to show that person's propensity or if they are not offered to show that that person engaged in conduct on a particular occasion because of his or her propensity to engage in that sort of conduct.

Cf. Treece v. Hochstetler, 213 F.3d 360, 363 (7th Cir. 2000) (holding, in plaintiff's civil rights action against police officer, police department, and city for malicious prosecution, that evidence of police officer's prior bad acts was inadmissible and properly excluded where it "did not 'bear a...That other wrongs or crimes show a person's pattern of conduct does not by itself make inapplicable either the prohibition in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(a) against the use of character or propensity to show that person's conduct on a particular occasion or the corollary prohibition in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) against the use of other wrongs or crimes to show character or propensity for the purpose of showing a person's conduct on a particular occasion.