I am wondering from anyone out there has HTCIA decided to say that their members can do criminal defense work or is it still the same old HTCIA?
The reason I ask this is that I had a case I couldn't do because of another upcoming surgery, but I like the attorney and wanted to find her another firm to use. I made a few calls and emails, and 2 of the firms had huge HTCIA Logos. (Forgot to mention this is not a CP case, as some people seem to believe people charged with those crimes have no rights)
The first guy said he would do the work and I asked him about his membership in HTCIA and if it allowed him to do criminal work. He mentioned they have not opened it up as of yet. I asked him if he had a voucher or waiver (see end of the post) and he said he didn't. So knowing that he is a member and doesn't have a waiver or voucher to say it's OK and he's willing it do it anyway, made me think he might be willing to do other things and I felt uncomfortable. So he's out
The second place also said they would do it and that neither of the examiners had a voucher or waiver. I asked if that presented a problem with regards to submitting your CV saying you are an HTCIA member and that you've had training at an HTCIA conference etc. because this case 100% was going to trial and there would be testimony required. They said no issues.
Is there an issue here? It seems they want the rewards of the networking, ability to take classes, put the logo on their site, and everything else that goes with it, but don't want to play by the rules.
Does this have any effect on the questioning of the person, the trial, or the work they work on?
I've got my own thoughts, but would enjoy hearing others.
Thanks.
oh the by-laws, almost forgot.
The whole waiver idea seems silly with me to begin with. Either you don't like criminal defense people and you want them out, or you do want them in, why in the world should there be an inbetween for a year?
Members may not, by virtue of their employment be in a position to represent or assist the defense in a criminal prosecution, unless 6
They are employed by an entity (military of governmental) that does not distinguish between prosecution or defense (An example of such incidences are military attorneys and/or investigators who are directed to work for the prosecution at times or the defense at other times).
They are a member of an International chapter whose member's legal system does not distinguish between prosecution or defense, provided the member must reside and practice in that country and not perform defense work in any country that does make that distinction.
They are a member who is subpoenaed to testify by the defense in a matter they investigated for their agency or employer.
They are a member who is employed by a software/hardware vendor who must explain how their company's product operates or functions as part of a service or legal agreement when sold.
They have received an exemption from a majority vote of their chapter membership, after a proper notice consistent with these bylaws. Such exemptions are
Limited to one per year, per member;
Exemptions can only be granted by chapters in cases where the member volunteers their expertise and is paid no compensation;
The International Executive Committee may revoke such an exemption within 30 days of receiving notice of the chapter's granting of same. If no decision is made by the International Executive Committee within 30 days, the Chapter memberships vote stands. However, a revocation of an exemption by the International Committee is final.
Which is why I am unwilling to join HTCIA . . .
The High Technology Crime Investigation Association (HTCIA) is designed to encourage, promote, aid and effect the voluntary interchange of data, information, experience, ideas and knowledge about methods, processes, and techniques relating to investigations and security in advanced technologies among its membership.
(my emphasis)
The key part is highlighted. It is their little club, so bug off.
In my opinion the reason they do not want members to work defense side is because this way they can appear more "upstanding", or more "pure" . . .
In reality it taints them as biased, which in itself is a blemish on their professionalism as forensic investigators.
Defense attorney Are you an HTCIA member?
HTCIA FI Yes.
Def A Do you adhere to their code of ethics?
HTCIA FI Yes.
Def A Your honor, I move to disqualify this expert witness as biased on grounds that he, and his organization code of ethics implies any all defense work is inappropriate for their members, and they are prejudicial to such defense.
Good stuff Jhup,
Same line of what I was thinking. It does appear to put them up here
____
and us down here
________
A wise attorney told me long ago, don't join any organization where you can even show a hint of being a hired gun for the defense or for the prosecution. Don't turn away cases based on the type of case unless it's something that hits too close to home or something you've been involved in the past.
Which is why I am unwilling to join HTCIA . . .
The High Technology Crime Investigation Association (HTCIA) is designed to encourage, promote, aid and effect the voluntary interchange of data, information, experience, ideas and knowledge about methods, processes, and techniques relating to investigations and security in advanced technologies among its membership.
(my emphasis)
The key part is highlighted. It is their little club, so bug off.
In my opinion the reason they do not want members to work defense side is because this way they can appear more "upstanding", or more "pure" . . .
In reality it taints them as biased, which in itself is a blemish on their professionalism as forensic investigators.
Defense attorney Are you an HTCIA member?
HTCIA FI Yes.
Def A Do you adhere to their code of ethics?
HTCIA FI Yes.
Def A Your honor, I move to disqualify this expert witness as biased on grounds that he, and his organization code of ethics implies any all defense work is inappropriate for their members, and they are prejudicial to such defense.
Funny really considering that IACIS is much more gov/leo aligned historically, and yet has no bar on defense work. But then the IACIS code of ethics stresses neutrality. Compare and contrast that. )
I was just reading the article on Forensic Magazine regarding this.
It was talking about "blind analysis", suggesting that for forensic investigators, "test results must be examined blind because it’s human nature to seize upon evidence that supports the investigator’s hypothesis and minimize or discredit evidence to the contrary."
I am not sure I agree 100%, but such thinking may give rise to a new class of FIs.
Here is a thought - FIs assigned by the court to the case, not associated with prosecution or defense, possibly allocating the cost as "court costs".
Regarding this last post I also do not agree with that 100%; it is, in my opinion, almost impossible to conduct forensics without knowledge of the allegation. Hence your forensic analysis is focused on finding evidence to either substantiate or unsubstantiate said allegation.
Now for a senior-to-junior forensic task assignment methodology, this could potentially work in that the junior analyst is tasked to collect certain types of data without being told the 'why' but again, the junior analyst will not be the one to go to the stand.
Such exemptions are
Limited to one per year, per member
I didn't see anything about the 1 year time. Are you sure you didn't misread that part ?
But either way between getting the case and doing the work and going to trial, I can see 12 months going by.
But I do agree anyone who is a member of HTCIA and does defense work is someone of unfavorable character and morals. That is pretty gutsy of them since they could ruin their reputations and hurt their business just to be in an organization.
In reality it taints them as biased, which in itself is a blemish on their professionalism as forensic investigators.
jhup, I think your way out of line with statement. You seem to be casting your own biases with that statement.
But I do agree anyone who is a member of HTCIA and does defense work is someone of unfavorable character and morals. That is pretty gutsy of them since they could ruin their reputations and hurt their business just to be in an organization.
Before I jump in, I'm curious if this is really what you intended to write?
-David
When I write that belonging to an organization which mandates to support only one side of life-impacting activity "taints them as biased", I mean that in my opinion, they appear biased to other people. Not to say that they are biased, but implies bias in the eyes of others.
I hope this response is sufficient to clarify my previous statement, that I not even remotely suggest, that someone is biased, or of unfavorable character or morals. That would be implying that I know each and every situation when someone breaks the rules of the organization . . . otherwise I would be biased, wouldn't I?
mrgreen
[…]
In reality it taints them as biased, which in itself is a blemish on their professionalism as forensic investigators.
jhup, I think your way out of line with statement. You seem to be casting your own biases with that statement.
It's a cut and paste from their site so yes I'm sure
Such exemptions are
Limited to one per year, per memberI didn't see anything about the 1 year time. Are you sure you didn't misread that part ?
But either way between getting the case and doing the work and going to trial, I can see 12 months going by.
But I do agree anyone who is a member of HTCIA and does defense work is someone of unfavorable character and morals. That is pretty gutsy of them since they could ruin their reputations and hurt their business just to be in an organization.
In reality it taints them as biased, which in itself is a blemish on their professionalism as forensic investigators.
jhup, I think your way out of line with statement. You seem to be casting your own biases with that statement.