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