Could allowing the handset/SIM to connect to the network inorder to receive SMS be classed as interception?
That has been raised in the past in a couple of ways.
Someone at NSLEC promulgated that by switching on the phone the examiner was purporting to be the subscriber of the phone by allowing the IMSI to be transmitted. That found no favour in any quarter.
The other issue was whether allowing incoming text messages was intercepting messages from the sending party without consent. That did not find favour either, because at first instance no phone is examined without authorisation therefore at minimum single-party (as oppose to both party consent) is given.
Additionally, the officer seizing follows the line of authority under RIPA regarding investigating and examination, were RIPA to be even relevant.
The issue of presenting the data in evidence is more problematical under data protection than it is for RIPA and interception because it is the duty of the Disclosing Officer to decide what data goes forward and has nothing to do with examiners (who should being doing their own job and not interferring in everyone elses, if you follow my drift).
If the above is not what you meant, then perhaps you could explain further?
If the above is not what you meant, then perhaps you could explain further?
No that answers any doubt.
Good to see articles discussing issues relating to mobile telephone examination
http//
What I like about this article is the author has finessed the article so that it does not end up with "and by using my services….."
so what would the procedure be a constable if a cell phone is found at the scene of crime. If the phone is on do they leave it until the scene of crime arrives, or do they place it a plastic bag? what if it is off same thing?
anyone know what they do in the US under the same circumstances?
My experience with seized cell phones differs quite a bit from what you describe here In every case, the phones I have examined that have been provided by law enforcement has either been left on in an evidence bag, (not a Faraday bag) or arrived with the phone switch off.
Law enforcement in my neck of the woods rarely analyzes cell phones at all above the thumb method.
I have arrived to examine a phone on several occasions to be told, "There;s nothing on the phone of use. We already looked at it." Meaning they thumbed through the phone without making any record of what was done.
Thanks Larry just looking for input from different members - dosen't sound like the men in blue are worried about forensics onsite just looking to see is in the address book or any text messages/email.
Any UK friends have any input?
I did send a PM to you moodhairboy but you didn't reply.
I talked last night with some US State LEO's and they said they would just tag & paper bag it "as is".
Which opened up some funny stories… Like where the kid being pursued chucked the phone. LEO picked it up, and it was in call to "mom". He asked "hey where do you live?" … then just met up with the kid at his house…
My experience with seized cell phones differs quite a bit from what you describe here In every case, the phones I have examined that have been provided by law enforcement has either been left on in an evidence bag, (not a Faraday bag) or arrived with the phone switch off.
Law enforcement in my neck of the woods rarely analyzes cell phones at all above the thumb method.
I have arrived to examine a phone on several occasions to be told, "There;s nothing on the phone of use. We already looked at it." Meaning they thumbed through the phone without making any record of what was done.
It sounds as though your local agencies are in dire need of a presentation on the preservation of digital evidence - perhaps specifically geared towards mobile devices…
I am somewhat surprised that they don't realize the possibility of evidence being contained on the device which could aid their investigation. I am aware of a few cases in .ca where the accused took photos with their mobile device (I was perusing case law pertaining to mobile devices…) which afforded incriminating evidence.
The organization I work for holds orientation sessions at Detachments / Services to ensure that front line officers know how to deal with various devices… education is a must, else we can't blame the front lines for doing what they're doing.
Faraday containers found unsafe
http//