Hello everyone,
I'm an attorney based in New York. I'm thinking of taking on legal matters pertaining to cyber-security and internet law, such as those related to fraud, hacking, DDOS, and so on. I presume that computer forensic professionals are the first points of contact for many such issues, so I'm happy this forum is available as a resource.
Do you folks ever come across any demand or interest in legal intervention by your clients? I'm trying to figure out if there are any interesting opportunities to cooperate or collaborate with companies or investigators in this industry.
I would be delighted to hear about any interest, suggestions and/or ideas. Thanks!
Best regards,
Joseph
P.S. Feel free to send private messages if needed.
Around 80% of my clients are lawyers (or their clients) so there is certainly no shortage of legal disputes where digital evidence is used.
The question really would be what type of matters are you looking to be involved in?
Criminal defense, corporate espionage, fraud, employment law (misconduct) etc..I'm in Australia but I can't imagine the issues would be that much different in the US.
I personally refuse to undertake any criminal defense work, but that is largely due to my LE background and also to protect the reputation of our firm as we don't want to be associated with criminals, however there are plenty of small Ftech operators that don't have those issues stopping them so you should have no problems finding qualified people to assist in any capacity.
Hey Adam, thanks so much for the response.
Similarly to you, I generally have a preference against taking on criminal defense work, as the freedom of clients is often at stake, which is unnerving to say the least.
I envision being more on the plaintiff's side of the aisle in civil cases involving cyber fraud, hacking, and any other matter where a computer and/or network is the target or tool of some wrongdoing.
I want to keep an open mind if there are any particular types of matters where the demand for legal intervention is particularly high, but I wouldn't know at this point. Hope that answers your question.
I generally have a preference against taking on criminal defense work.
Not sure I entirely understand your "preference"????
It MAY suggest that you only have a limited mindset. For myself, I am not sure what you mean. Are you making a singular moral decision prior to a person being found actually guilty in a court of law and does that mindset extend to The US President or Mrs Obama, The US Senate, High Court Judges, Film Stars, important lawyers, police officers, public servants etc? I can't say whether they make furtive moments or have shifty eyes?
Your observations came across as only accepting cases which are perceived to offer YOU a 99/01% verdict of guilty.
How do you emotionally feel about cases of 70/30%, 60/40%, 50/50% 40/60% etc ratio?
At what point do you
(a) decide the percentages of culpability
and
(b) who is guilty in your mind and who is innocent?
Apologies in advance if I am misread your statement. I am only testing the ground.
I forgive you.
)
Seems as though you misread the statement. When the life or freedom of a potential client is at risk, I prefer not to have that on my conscience.
Thanks for the private messages so far.
I generally have a preference against taking on criminal defense work.
Not sure I entirely understand your "preference"????
To be picky - as I am wink - I find more "interesting" the will to protect the reputation of the firm of our friend Adam10541
I personally refuse to undertake any criminal defense work, but that is largely due to my LE background and also to protect the reputation of our firm as we don't want to be associated with criminals, however there are plenty of small Ftech operators that don't have those issues stopping them so you should have no problems finding qualified people to assist in any capacity.
which IMHO really exchanges "accused" or "indicted" with "criminal" (guilty before trial).
jaclaz
Seems as though you misread the statement.
OK LawHammer, no worries. I wasn't entirely sure as your work seems complex and appreciate it is not easy, particularly as alot of us do not do your job.
Thanks for the private messages so far.
Just for the record, I haven't sent you any private messages but as you have an interest in cyber cases I could mention your name if you want.
Trewmte, I was speaking about other forum members that sent me private messages. Sure, feel free to mention me if you're willing. Thanks.
To be picky - as I am wink - I find more "interesting" the will to protect the reputation of the
which IMHO really exchanges "accused" or "indicted" with "criminal" (guilty before trial).
jaclaz
Surely you aren't naive enough to think that mud doesn't stick? Guilt or innocence is irrelevant when it comes to public perception. If you doubt that just ask the average American what they think of OJ Simpson 😉
Besides which I spent too long locking bad guys up to want to play any part in (possibly) assisting guilty people get off.
And significantly, in this part of the world there is no money in it )
I envision being more on the plaintiff's side of the aisle in civil cases involving cyber fraud, hacking, and any other matter where a computer and/or network is the target or tool of some wrongdoing.
In the USA, these are civil matter? No penal?