Piotr sues for wrongful termination. Piotr's attorney serves a trial subpoena on Warner, an employee of DataCo. who was present at a meeting where the termination of discussed by Warner and six other DataCo. employees. During his trial testimony, Warner mentioned Tina a number of specific details regarding the matter that were only known by DataCo. employees, and they all present at the meeting had agreed to keep confidential. During the examination, Piotr's attorney makes for identification and shows to Warner a page of handwritten notes, dated as of the date of the meeting, which Warner testified he found in the conference room where the meeting occurred the day after the meeting. Piotr's attorney does not offer any witness testimony regarding whose handwriting it is or testimony that anyone saw the notes being written. However, the notes contain numerous specific details that would have only been known to one of the participants in the meeting. Piotr moves notes into evidence as a document written by a DataCo. employee. DataCo.'s attorney objects on authentication grounds.
How should the judge rule?

a) Sustain the objection, because there is no witness who recognizes the handwriting.

b) Sustain the objection, because there is no witness who recalls writing the notes or seeing them being written.

c) Overrule the objection, because there is sufficient circumstantial evidence of the notes authenticity.

d) Overrule the objection, because the attorney's assertion that they are authentic satisfies the sufficiency standard.