Digital evidence collection process in integrity and memory information gathering

The article is devoted to the study of theoretical and practical aspects of determining the evidences obtained as a result of investigative (search) actions as inadmissible in the criminal proceeding. The criminal procedural law of Ukraine formulates general requirements which must be followed during the evidence-collection process: 1) the legal sources of evidences; 2) the proper registration of the course and results of procedural actions during criminal proceedings; 3) the evidence-collection process fulfilled by appropriate authorities; 4) legal method for obtaining evidences. Failure to comply with these requirements results in the inadmissibility of evidences. However, further study of theoretical and practical aspects of determining evidences as inadmissible has shown that some requirements are not so obvious so it is difficult to identify them immediately. Analyzing the judicial practice of Ukraine, researching the scientific works of domestic scientists, as well as studying the works of foreign experts in terms of the general concept of admissibility of evidences, we can see the need for legal determinancy, which requires criminal procedure law. It causes subjectivism and different interpretations of admissibility or inadmissibility of evidences, which create an incredible number of problems that complicate the conduct of criminal proceeding at both pre-trial investigation and court hearing. This is confirmed by a large number of cases related to the recognition of admissibility or inadmissibility of evidences. Uncertainty of the categorical-conceptual apparatus not only leads to incorrect application of criminal procedural law during the course of investigative (search) actions by pre-trial investigation bodies in order to gather and obtain admissible evidences, but also helps to facilitate ways to circumvent certain provisions of law.

Download Full-text

Digital Evidence

Digital Business Security Development ◽

10.4018/978-1-60566-806-2.ch002 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 37-72

Author(s):

Richard Boddington

Keyword(s):

Digital Evidence ◽

Security Risk ◽

Business Managers ◽

Security Systems ◽

Legal Cases ◽

True Nature ◽

Relevant Evidence ◽

Evidence Collection ◽

Expert Analysis ◽

And Training

Digital evidence, now more commonly relied upon in legal cases, requires an understanding of the processes used in its identification, preservation, analysis and validation. Business managers relying on digital evidence in the corporate environment need a greater understanding of its true nature and difficulties affecting its usefulness in criminal, civil and disciplinary proceedings. This chapter describes digital evidence collection and analysis, and the implications of common challenges diminishing its admissibility. It looks at determining the evidentiary weight of digital evidence that can be perplexing and confusing because of the complexity of the technical domain. Digital evidence present on computer networks is easily replaced, altered, destroyed or concealed and requires special protection to preserve its evidentiary integrity. Consequently, business managers seeking the truth of a matter can find it a vexing experience, unless provided with a clear appraisal and interpretation of the relevant evidence. Validating evidence, that is often complex and incomplete, requires expert analysis to determine its value in legal cases to provide timely guidance to business managers and their legal advisers. While soundly configured security systems and procedures enhance data protection and recovery, they are often limited in the way they preserve digital evidence. Unprepared personnel can also contaminate evidence unless procedural guidelines and training are provided. The chapter looks at the benefits for prudent organisations, who may wish to include cyber forensic strategies as part of their security risk contingency, planning to minimise loss or degradation of digital evidence which, if overlooked, may have adverse legal repercussions.

Download Full-text

A Model for Hybrid Evidence Investigation

Emerging Digital Forensics Applications for Crime Detection, Prevention, and Security ◽

10.4018/978-1-4666-4006-1.ch011 ◽

2013 ◽

pp. 150-165 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Konstantinos Vlachopoulos ◽

Emmanouil Magkos ◽

Vassileios Chrissikopoulos

Keyword(s):

Information And Communication Technologies ◽

Communication Technologies ◽

Crime Scene ◽

Digital Evidence ◽

Digital Form ◽

Physical Evidence ◽

Evidence Collection ◽

Information And Communication ◽

Digital Or ◽

Crime Scenes

With the advent of Information and Communication Technologies, the means of committing a crime and the crime itself are constantly evolved. In addition, the boundaries between traditional crime and cybercrime are vague: a crime may not have a defined traditional or digital form since digital and physical evidence may coexist in a crime scene. Furthermore, various items found in a crime scene may worth be examined as both physical and digital evidence, which the authors consider as hybrid evidence. In this paper, a model for investigating such crime scenes with hybrid evidence is proposed. Their model unifies the procedures related to digital and physical evidence collection and examination, taking into consideration the unique characteristics of each form of evidence. The authors’ model can also be implemented in cases where only digital or physical evidence exist in a crime scene.

Download Full-text

Impediments in Mobile Forensics

Advances in Digital Crime, Forensics, and Cyber Terrorism - Confluence of AI, Machine, and Deep Learning in Cyber Forensics ◽

10.4018/978-1-7998-4900-1.ch008 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 134-144

Author(s):

Vani Thangapandian

Keyword(s):

Mobile Devices ◽

Mobile Phones ◽

Daily Life ◽

Digital Technologies ◽

Digital Evidence ◽

Dynamic Nature ◽

Mobile Forensics ◽

Digital Era ◽

Evidence Collection ◽

Digital Equipment

In this digital era, the usage of mobile phones in daily life has become inextricable due to the facilities and the level of sophistication it offers. Proportionately, the crimes and offenses involving the mobile devices are growing in rapid speed. Whenever a crime occurs in a spot, the forensic team will arrive there to identify and locate the evidence of the criminals. If the crime involves digital equipment like computers and laptop, then digital forensic team will investigate and analyze the devices for digital evidence collection. These days, mobile phones have the capability to offer any kind of information and services digitally on top of the palm of the user. Anything is available on the hands with a single touch on the screen of the mobile devices. It also offers to the adversaries many digital services which are harmful to the societies. The fast-paced advancement in the digital front paves the way for many digital crimes. Hence, a new field, mobile forensics, emerges out to trace the evidence, but it faces many challenges due to the dynamic nature of the digital technologies.

Download Full-text

An approach to digital evidence collection for successful forensic application: An investigation of blackmail case

2015 38th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO) ◽

10.1109/mipro.2015.7160491 ◽

2015 ◽

Author(s):

Kemal Hajdarevic ◽

Vahidin Dzaltur

Keyword(s):

Digital Evidence ◽

Forensic Application ◽

Evidence Collection

Download Full-text

Reading History Forward

Political Science and Politics ◽

10.1017/s104909652000092x ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-5

Author(s):

Jørgen Møller

Keyword(s):

Historical Data ◽

Historical Analysis ◽

Explanatory Factors ◽

Collection Process ◽

Evidence Collection ◽

Reading History ◽

Selection Of ◽

Methodological Debate ◽

The Way

ABSTRACT Recent decades have seen a productive methodological debate about how political scientists “do history.” However, on one important point, the discussion has been surprisingly thin. This concerns the problem of reading history backward rather than forward. To understand this problem, we need to embed it in broader methodological discussions of how the selection of evidence is shaped (and potentially biased) by all sorts of prior assumptions going into the evidence-collection process. Thus, reading history backward makes scholars refrain from posing certain questions, become blind to certain descriptive developments and explanatory factors, and fail to enlist certain historical data. This article pulls together the fragmentary insights about this problem and devises an alternative, prospective approach centered on an open reading of the work of historians. Although this is a “low-tech” issue, it is one that has huge ramifications for the way we do historical analysis as political scientists.

Download Full-text