for the court to determine in accordance with the provisions of Pa.R.E. 104. However, when an issue is raised (a) whether the asserted writing ever existed, or (b) whether another writing, recording, or photograph produced at trial is the original, or (c) whether other evidence of contents correctly reflects the contents, the issue is for the trier of fact to determine as in the case of other issues of fact. Pa.R.E. 1008. See also Binder on Pennsylvania Evidence § 10.08 at 630 (discuss ing allocation of fact-finding functions between judge and jury). ¶ 35 If the Commonwealth does not need to prove the contents of the writing or recording to prove the elements of the offense charged, then the Commonwealth is not required to introduce the original writing or recording. Fisher, supra (<HOLDING>). See also Commonwealth v. Steward, 762 A.2d
holding commonwealth was not required to introduce original recordings from voice mail system where phone messages did not provide proof of elements of offenses charged holding that defendants substantial rights were affected by unconstitutional admission of outofcourt testimonial statements that established elements of the charged offenses holding that a defendants statements regarding offenses for which he had not been charged were admissible notwithstanding the attachment of his sixth amendment right to counsel on other charged offenses holding that proof of an explicit agreement is not required holding that when defendants plead not guilty the government is required to prove all elements of charged offenses including intent