Jimmer,
Who really has the power the client's defense attorney or your defense attorney (i.e. prosecutor, DA, USDA) Prosecutors are master webspinners and USDA's lol they charge people in computer cases routinely with poor evidence because they know that for a defendant to win in Federal court is as likely as the Clippers winning back to back championships.
The defense side doesn't hold a grand jury and manipulate people into inditing.
I love these type of topics because when you think about it most LE end up doing defense work in some capacity whether it be criminal or civil after they leave LE.
This issue is funny because it is most always an us and them mentality, well the 1's and 0's are the same for you as they are for me, it is what it is. Spin city comes in the form of opinions of the particualr examiners which can be taken several ways.
Lest we forget organizations like HTCIA who say that you can't do criminal defense work and be a member of our organization. Everyone is guilty, lock us all up.
I have to agree with you on several points. I too think grand jurys are a joke. Very cases presented to a grand jury go unindicted. As to who holds a better hand. I beieve it is the defense attorneys, from personal experiences far more people are investigated and arrested then are ultimately tried. The reason a lot of LE goes to the defense side is the money, the prosecution's side is usually quite regulated on how much they can spend or its investigators can make. But with the defense side the cost is what the market will bear. And yes its an us vs them mentality. I don't know if that is right or wrong but thats what it is.
Which makes making decesions on whether to report cp etc harder on all of us.
Update
I heard back from the detective. The suspect has plead guilty.
CP was found by LE before I was handed the evidence. The suspect, the suspect's defense attroney, the district attorney were all in agreement for 3rd party review before I was contacted.
I talked to the detective about this conversation on the forum. I inquired that "Why was I allowed to leave the police station with a copy of evidence and the EnCase report considering the nature of the content?"
Answer - Not too toot my horn and blow it too, the detective considered various factors for picking me for the job.
1) I am the only Certified Computer Examiner in the area.
2) He has seen me in the local paper since I have solved couple high profile local cases.
3) I have expert witness testimony experience.
4) Me living in the same county and township helped as well.
I also wanted to clarify some things. When this post was originally started (by me) quite some time ago, I was merely gathering opinions. The recent posts are real world experience. I strongly agree if CP is encountered, notify LE immediately. By this recent case and this discussion I agree with how complicated 'evidence handling and transfer' can get. But IMHO, if you do not break any guidelines, principles and laws and all the involved parties are in agreement, the objective can be achieved.
Ara,
I have to tell you that while your accomplishments are very notable and impressive ahd have a lot do with people hiring you and you getting business, I can say that these
1) I am the only Certified Computer Examiner in the area.
2) He has seen me in the local paper since I have solved couple high profile local cases.
3) I have expert witness testimony experience.
4) Me living in the same county and township helped as well.
are difficult factors to say that someone can leave with contraband and the above facts are the reason.
Anytime I am given a drive that is KNOWN to contain contraband I make sure that I get a protective order from the Judge ON this particular case that lays out everything that is covered and how the evidence will be viewed, stored, and handled.. I know this is a departure from the topic where someone finds it but what is to say that the detective, da, and attorney one day say I don't remember that conversation? The other thing that I would consider is that the detective doesn't bring charges so I would hold him last in the line of all the people you mentioned.
Just my .02 and it is not meant to be taken as anything but opinions from me. There is no offense meant in this or any other posts on this topic.
Armrsel,
I see you point and don't disagree with getting a protective order from the judge. But the evidence was so clear in this case that everyone (DA, defendent, LE etc.) knew that this was not going to court.
Regarding credentials and experience, I strongly disagree with you. Would you prefer someone proven / experienced to handle such sensitive evidence or just anyone who can use a computer?
As for contraband - 3rd party analysis was needed. What could have we done different?
a) Perform the analysis at the police station?
b) I should have been escorted in police car to my lab with the evidence?
c) The evidence handling seemed too complicated, turn down the job?
All opinions and comments are welcome. No offense taken.
The only thing that I can add is many times postal inspectors have brought drives to my office and I have had to sign evidence receipts, on occasion the feds have stopped by to see what kind of storage facility I had and how the security of the building was. I feel that the part about driving to and from the station is not realistic but I know that many times LE will ask that you do the work in their office or at what they call a "neutral" location like RCFL.
arashiryu, I understand what you are saying. I dont really have any opinion on why they picked you. However, I really do question the DA and the Detective for calling in a third person. Under discovery, the defense is entitled to copies of all evidence and the right to have it examined by experts of thier own. They then have the oppurtunity to dispute the evidence in court. I think it was a risk by the DA to agree to such a move. What if you had not come out with the same results, who would you have testified for? Who paid you? The govt? The defense? If the government paid you then you would be a hostile witness allowing yourself to be questioned by the prosecution who could only have attacked your abilties and brought into question your expert witness status. If the defense paid, then your a little better off. The prosecution will still come after you but at least a jury would understand that scenario as compared to paying someone then attacking them.
In all my years of police work I can honestly say I have never heard of this type of arrangement and agreement. What I mean is if you didn't get the same results would the prosecution drop its case? And if the case was that strong that the prosecution KNEW what you would find, why jeopardize the case. I would tell the bad guy plead guilty or we go to court. After all thats what we get paid for is it not?
Let me assure you I am not questioning you or your actions in this matter. Nothing is meant by my disagreeing. Just playing a little devils advocate to spur discussion……but this just blows my mind!
Jimmer,
The retainer was with the defense attorney and he paid me after the analysis was completed.
Well, it worked out well for all invovled. You gained some valuable experience and hopefully some insight on what to expect in future cases, and the bad guy went to jail!
Jimmer,
Thank you for all your input and insight. I am glad we had this healthy discussion. I hope someone got some benefit from this.
Although I must admit I was worried for sometime the way the conversations were going. Thank you for the tip on 'judge's protective order'. I wasn't aware of such order. I am going to ask for it next time. I believe in layered approach. This is an additional layer that will protect the evidence and the evidence handler. Same for "Trust but Verify".
Good lesson learned on Evidence Handling.