Yes and No. AKA it depends.

Examples:

1. Had a kid try out for our Basketball team and get cut on day one. He created a fake text from “team coach” saying he made it to the team and then shared it with his friends.

Correct…not a “receipt” as it was forged and, as Example 2 points out, not able to be corroborated via evidence.

2. Elderly uncle was taken advantage of with the recent sale of his home. A “cash buyer” came in under false pretenses during a highly emotional time (the death of his wife of 68 years!) and his military services was preyed upon etc.

After a little digging into the buyer it turns out this is a pattern.

The state investigator requested “any documentation” he may have.

Well there is no easy way to export text messages, so screenshots INCLUDING clear date and times visible, is what was supplied as “receipts”.

The investigator is then able to attain corresponding receipts such as via telco provider the messages transmitted through, if not directly from the perpetrator’s device(s).

—-
Thus, it really just depends on context and what one is trying to evidence as to whether or not a screenshot is sufficient.

The more confluences attained, the better. (That should definitely be obvious 😀)
nostr:nevent1qqspwjseyhjvc2cna5egf9p7avaydemn8dlehxa38h6u3q3eu7a56kcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhg3fhvxv