We sucessfully argued this week at the NC Senate to have the licensing for DFEs removed from the House Bill. NC will not be licensing Digital Forensics examiners at all.
Good to know! When will this exemption take effect? I am anxious to expand my practice to my good neighbor-State to the North!
D D D
-AWTLPI
Since we were not licensed to begin with, it is immediate. Of course, if you come up here, you'll have to compete with me! 😉
We sucessfully argued this week at the NC Senate to have the licensing for DFEs removed from the House Bill. NC will not be licensing Digital Forensics examiners at all.
Good job and congrats, Larry.
Since we were not licensed to begin with, it is immediate. Of course, if you come up here, you'll have to compete with me! 😉
That'll be fine. From you podcasts it seems you've got plenty of work already. I'll just take the crumbs that fall off the table, particularly in the Charlotte and points-west area. And if you need a hand down here in SC, PM me. It's all good!
lol
-AWTLPI
Just to belabor the point, in addition to being a computer forensics professional I am also a licensed medical professional and have appeared as an expert witness in this respect and have also served on a jury where other medical experts were testifying.
Now, as an analogy, supposing that I am sent a sample of blood upon which a test is to be done, say, a blood alcohol level for a DUI case (this actually happened). And in the process of providing testimony, I am asked questions related to the metabolism of alcohol, the interval of time between the suspect's apprehension and the blood test (defense attorneys always try to argue that the last drink was right before the dude got on the road and if he hadn't been apprehended and detained, he would have been home before he reached the legal limit).
Nothing in that process requires that I be a PI, even though I am testifying about evidence and giving a professional opinion.
How is this different from giving a professional opinion about my findings on a computer system? Why do I need a PI license in one instance and not in the other?
[Deleted duplicate post.]
Just to belabor the point, in addition to being a computer forensics professional I am also a licensed medical professional and have appeared as an expert witness in this respect and have also served on a jury where other medical experts were testifying.
Now, as an analogy, supposing that I am sent a sample of blood upon which a test is to be done, say, a blood alcohol level for a DUI case (this actually happened). And in the process of providing testimony, I am asked questions related to the metabolism of alcohol, the interval of time between the suspect's apprehension and the blood test (defense attorneys always try to argue that the last drink was right before the dude got on the road and if he hadn't been apprehended and detained, he would have been home before he reached the legal limit).
Nothing in that process requires that I be a PI, even though I am testifying about evidence and giving a professional opinion.
How is this different from giving a professional opinion about my findings on a computer system? Why do I need a PI license in one instance and not in the other?
Good questions! …And I don't feel the point is belabored if the thread leads to meaningful dialog, which it has returned to. wink
In the example you cite, such testimony strikes me as being that of an expert witness relating to the Court medical/scientific principles as they apply to the case under scrutiny. No, you should not need to be a PI in such an example. Your credentials would have been established by the AMA and/or your State's medical licensing board.
If *I* were asked by the Court to explain the general procedures for collecting digital evidence, I shouldn't be required to be a PI, although I expect *my* credentials should have been vetted.
Here's where the "PI part" comes in, given a slightly different scenario What if you had to, perhaps, surreptitiously collect a blood sample? Or what if *you* were the one to question the Subject as to when she had her last drink? What if you had been following the Subject during her evening of carousing in order to establish a time-line of her consumption? Let's say you are doing so on behalf of her soon-to-be ex-husband in anticipation of a child-custody hearing? Don't you think you should be a licensed PI? I do.
Again, allow me to quote part of the
SECTION 40-18-20. Definitions.
As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, the term
(A) "Private investigation business" means engaging in business or accepting employment to obtain or furnish information with reference to the
(1) identity, habits, conduct, business, occupation, honesty, integrity, credibility, knowledge, trustworthiness, efficiency, loyalty, activity, movement, whereabouts, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of a person;
…
(4) securing of evidence to be used in a criminal or civil proceeding, or before a board, an administrative agency, an officer, or investigating committee.
- Emphasis added.
That reads like a good description of what a digital forensic examiner does. Our State's Attorney General agrees.
Yes, to practice in SC, I have to be a licensed PI, meaning (among other things) I've been fingerprinted, undergone a criminal and financial background check, carry a bond and conform to a code of conduct. What's wrong with that? The annual license fee of $350 is a bite out of my wallet, but I more than make up for it (by orders of magnitude) by referrals from the old-school PIs that *don't* perform CFEs.
As to gkelley's earlier post
Reporters interview and investigate, I am not aware of any licensing that they have to go through, much less PI licensing. Their reporting and investigating can get people fired, divorced and be investigated by law enforcement for potential criminal charges. My point is, I don't see how interviewing and investigating dictates that I be licensed as a PI.
Funny you should bring that example up! A year ago, almost to the day, the SC Administrative Law Court
In its Conclusions of Law, Section 4. the Court opined
While in the performance of their duties, attorneys are specifically exempt from licensure under Title 40, Chapter 18. S.C. Code Ann. § 40-18-140(3) (Supp. 2007). That is, attorneys in practicing their profession are not required to obtain a private investigation license even though they may perform some of the same duties broadly outlined in the statutory definition of private investigation. Attorneys rely extensively on their agents and office staff to prepare for litigation. It naturally follows that an attorney’s agent is similarly exempt from licensure. As a mitigation specialist, Mrs. O’Shea is an agent of the attorneys performing work exclusively to be used in preparation for capital litigation.
- Ibid.
The point of all of this is that, if you perform what "looks like" PI work in SC, expect to be a licensed PI unless and until you can fight for an exemption. Me? I'd rather just keep my license. 8)
-AWTLPI
Here's where the "PI part" comes in, given a slightly different scenario What if you had to, perhaps, surreptitiously collect a blood sample? Or what if *you* were the one to question the Subject as to when she had her last drink? What if you had been following the Subject during her evening of carousing in order to establish a time-line of her consumption? Let's say you are doing so on behalf of her soon-to-be ex-husband in anticipation of a child-custody hearing? Don't you think you should be a licensed PI? I do.
Again, as I said before, I don't do that kind of work. I examine computers when agreed to by the parties or ordered by the courts and I make my reports to my clients' counsel. I may testify as to my findings and their interpretation. I may sit in on the questioning of witnesses and I may assist counsel or the prosecutor in the preparation of questions, depositions, or subpoenas, but I do not directly question witnesses, myself, and do not serve subpoenas nor do I execute search warrants.
And, as a physician, I do not obtain patient samples surreptitiously; the police perform those services. I merely analyse what I am given and report on the result.
For this, I think, my only qualification should be expertise the in the area which pertains to my examination.
seanmcl,
Forget it. He's a PI, and as such he's made his mind up that everyone else must be a PI, too. No matter how much common sense or rationale you apply, you will be wrong.
On the other hand, if you knew very little about forensics, if you could solely interact with a GUI and process data, and if you possessed a PI license, then you would be "right', and you would be "qualified" to practice in the forensics industry, just as long has you had that PI license. 😉
Mind you, lacking education, knowledge, experience, and work history you will be unable to join the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, but you could become a PI.
Cheers!
farmerdude
Does anyone here have a PI license in Michigan? The requirements look a bit difficult to obtain. ?