Homework Help

FORENSIC EVIDENCE PROCESSING 6

Forensic Evidence Processing

Dylan Cato

CRJS 475

American Intercontinental University

01/05/2023

Forensic Evidence Processing

In the contemporary world, millions of people have made portable electronics including smartphones and PC part of their lives. They can hardly survive even a day or even hours without interacting with these gadgets. Millions of people are utilizing the contraptions created as a result of PC progression (Trujillo, 2019). The contraptions together with the PC have created a network of records as well as information regarding people and their day-to-day activities. The data and information are either stored locally in the gadgets or the cloud.

Based on the case that has been provided above, the initial thing that should be kept in mind is determining possible reasons why seizure and search should be carried out. Any procedure that should be followed as far as the case is concerned should be handled with a lot of legal care. Therefore, it is fundamental to carry the evidence which will help in obtaining the court order. With the judicial order in place, moving on with the case will be relatively easy since it will be protected within the law (Trujillo, 2019). However, in case the evidence is at risk and the investigators can prove that truly the evidence is at risk, then the investigations can commence even without any court order.

It should be known clearly that there exist two major laws protecting citizens against any illegal searches and seizures. The laws further serve to ensure that the procedure being followed does not serve to violate the privacy of the individuals in any way. This branch of computer forensics incorporates two major dockets, computer science, and law, intending to investigate crimes that might have been committed (Haq & Atta, 2019). As pointed out earlier, the pieces of evidence collected remain viable if and only if a legal due process was followed when collecting them and the privacy rights of the suspects were not violated in any way. These are the minimum conditions under which the court can choose to consider the pieces of evidence presented to them. Further, the investigating bodies and persons must adhere to the laws when recovering and analyzing any data in computers which is required. The most unfortunate thing which brings more issues, and some contradicting is that some of the laws were established before computer forensics was introduced (Haq & Atta, 2019). Therefore, they might present situations that are not workable with forensics. Though the laws are doing a significant job of upholding the rights of the people, they equally come along with their disadvantages. For instance, the laws might result in the discarding of the evidence gathered or simply, result in the violation of the two amendments, 4th and 5th.

Another concern that has been raised is that the laws are not as aggressive as technological advancement. This further makes them complicates issues and the efforts of computer and digital forensics. The laws limit a lot of evidence that has been presented in the court as they demand adherence to the laws. This has made several criminals take advantage of legal matters with the sole aim of covering up their wrongdoings and criminal acts in which they are involved in.

Accusations about terror, murder, and sexual harassment have been made easier with computer and digital forensics. Criminals, together with the people that they are working with have capitalized on networks to recruit more people and easily share their information. A specific example of a group that has exploited networking is ISIS. The groups have increased the number of people watching and following through sexual predators and hence, ended up attacking potential victims who come their way. Investigators have found it easy to trace the criminals (Chase, 2020). This is because criminals hardly safeguard the information they are using online. For the few who happen to delete the information from online platforms, the information remains stored in local drives like computer hard disks. The experts in the area are also able to track down the information which they might need.

There exist four different approaches which the court has taken regarding the doctrine of electronic data searching. These are ‘apply it to electronic searches, require discovery to be inadvertent, use filter kits, or abandon the use of plain sight entirely.’ Any practitioner who loses an argument that simple sight does not apply to electronic searches should need to go the extra mile and examine the procedures to be followed in separating the irrelevant electronic material with the authorization done in the provided search warrant (Chase, 2020). Such practitioners should seek alternative measures when assessing the actual materials which are associated with an alleged criminal offense. Failure to follow due process, failure to seek permission to go ahead with the investigations, and failure to inadvertent the discovery, the presentation can follow a serious setback in court, mounting a serious argument on a simple government argument.

The government’s attempt of claiming an inevitable discovery can easily be rebuked. It is demanded that the government should always return the equipment once the search is through. Besides, the government should destroy any documents found which were not used in the process (Chase, 2020). This implies that if the government can follow due process in collecting the documents, there will be no materials to be disposed of as everything collected would have been used in the required manner.

Technology advancements have resulted in the development of the Global Position System (GPS), a program that is embedded in all smartphones. The software can be used by prosecutors in tracking the whereabouts of the suspects (Haq & Atta, 2019). The firms working on computer forensics are also developing equipment and products on satellite browsers. This makes it easier to have gadgets well equipped with GPS technology.

Several PC owners have encrypted the information available on their PCs. This has made it difficult for other people to access the information unless authorized. This makes it difficult for the investigators to access the information (Haq & Atta, 2019). The Fifth Amendment further protects these people. Even those hiding sensitive information which can be used to attack others are protected by the amendment.

In conclusion, the researcher has pointed out the necessary forensic procedures to be followed when collecting data and forensic evidence from the suspects’ devices while adhering to the fourth and Fifth Amendments. The number of people owning PCs is on the rise and therefore, their networking with others is also on the rise. The amount of information on the network, which is aimed at attacking people is on the rise. The major issue emanating from the amendments is the attempt of reforming the presently occurring digital crimes.

References

Chase, A. (2020). Secure the Smartphone, Secure the Future: Biometrics, Boyd, a Warrant Denial and the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. Hastings Race & Poverty LJ, 17, 577.

Haq, U., & Atta, Q. (2019). Cyber Security and Analysis of Cyber-Crime Laws to Restrict Cyber Crime in Pakistan. International Journal of Computer Network & Information Security, 11(1).

Trujillo, M. (2019). Computer Crimes. Am. Crim. L. Rev., 56, 615.