Good discussion re disclosure of digital evidence in the UK

Under the Criminal Procedures Investigation Act it defines what is Sensitive Material. This includes ‘Material relating to the private life of a witness’. (Right to privacy under ECHR legislation).
The advice is that this type of material should Not be disclosed.
It seems that you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t!

Yes very good. Puts in mind what about privacy for those identifiable persons who are not witnesses and have no involvement with a case. Crikey! that would set a bad precedent if the defence expert starts roping into a case non-relevant persons just to make a point… That is meant in terms of less experienced individuals handling digital material and including it in a submitted report. Defence may well find they have to redact their own expert's report.

Under the Criminal Procedures Investigation Act it defines what is Sensitive Material. This includes ‘Material relating to the private life of a witness’. (Right to privacy under ECHR legislation).
The advice is that this type of material should Not be disclosed.
It seems that you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t!

Does it specifically say witness and if so would this include victim? You'd hope so for the same reasons but still

I believe there is no problem disclosing to a suspect what was found on their computer. The problems are

what do you disclose from a victims computer?

What do you disclose to the co-defendant from the other suspects computer?

I think we need to point this out to the OIC and the decision should be theirs or in a major enquiry for the disclosure officer to decide.

An interesting video from my point of view which is American, and newly retired hence the time to spend on this. 8)

Peter Sommer says around 101440 that he's proposing making a copy of the forensic image available to the defense because exhaustive analysis is not possible. I'm surprised that this is not already common practice! I would expect any competent defense attorney in the U.S. to demand a full image copy for independent analysis. Exceptions would be if CP was involved, but even then a full image copy in a controlled environment, vice an uncontrolled duplicate, should still be obtained.

Around 1035, the question revolves around the standard magic bullet wish, what new tool eliminates the need for understanding and knowledge? I saw that here all the time as well.

Around 1046, "Can't get evidence from U.S. based companies." Most ironic as headline news here often complains the opposite.

Around 1055, too much bureaucracy and not enough funding. Oh no, the UK is the same as the US!

The whole second panel, starting around 1103, while interesting from a legal and social point of view, has nothing to do with digital forensics.

Peter Sommer says around 101440 that he's proposing making a copy of the forensic image available to the defense because exhaustive analysis is not possible. I'm surprised that this is not already common practice! I would expect any competent defense attorney in the U.S. to demand a full image copy for independent analysis. Exceptions would be if CP was involved, but even then a full image copy in a controlled environment, vice an uncontrolled duplicate, should still be obtained.

This is standard practice in the UK already. Every request I receive would include the forensic image files as a minimum

I agree in full disclosure when it comes to the defendants own computer or phone but in the circumstances of a co-defendant or a victims computer the OIC or disclosure officer should review before giving it to the defence.
Anything that assists the defence should be disclosed.

Hi,

Of course one of the issues with disclosing everything is most defendants won't even have their own expert.

I've been in digital forensics a long time and I don't think I've ever seen the market so short of experts doing work for the defence. There isn't enough money to make it viable.

The situation I am most used to now is how do I provide 'everything' to the solicitors in a format that they can use? This becomes even harder if the solicitors don't engage with the police and indicate what exhibits and what data may help their case.

Steve

I've been in digital forensics a long time and I don't think I've ever seen the market so short of experts doing work for the defence. There isn't enough money to make it viable.

…and the cost of ISO17025 will finish them off!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b5t824

This was on BBC Radio 4 this evening. Well worth a listen if you have not already. The majority of the discussion is about digital forensics.

In addition to the oral evidence to the UK House of Commons Justice Select Commitee already referred to, here is myearlier written evidence.
https://goo.gl/YUXQfm

If rather than watching the tv version of the oral evidence you'd like a transcript, here it is
http//data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/justice-committee/disclosure-of-evidence-in-criminal-cases/oral/83096.pdf

I have also written a blog about the problems of "too much disclosure" in relation to rape trials
http//pmsommer.blogspot.com/2018/05/

Some people have suggested that "AI" might provide solutions to disclosure/discovery here are my comments
http//pmsommer.blogspot.com/2018/06/can-artificial-intelligence-solve.html

Finally, the perennial issue of accreditation. I have written about this before but here is pre-print of what is appearing in the academic journal Digital Investigation
https://goo.gl/ynFUDd