Computer Forensics Blog

The science of computer forensics is going through something like what happened in the .com era, when .com investments became the “big money” of the day. Now computer forensics is seen in the same light. Techies who, yesterday, were managing small networks are, today, computer forensic experts—with minimal tools, little or no training, meaningless certifications and no expert witness experience in court. Worse, unsuspecting clients are hiring unqualified experts.

Awareness of what to look for in an expert is key.

Training and certifications specific to computer forensics leads the list. It speaks to credibility, and the best trained, best certified computer forensic examiners are prior law enforcement.

Background, education, and experience are very important, and again, law enforcement experience is a plus, if for no other reason than your expert is guaranteed to be an experienced expert witness.

Computer forensic examiners in many states are required to be licensed private investigators. In California, Section 7521 of the Business and Professions (B&P) code list what business activities mandate the computer forensics examiner to be a licensed private investigator.

References (both notable and plentiful) should be readily available to a prospective client seeking a forensic computer examiner.

Computer Forensic examiners should have a fully equipped, state-of-the-art laboratory, running the latest, fastest computers dedicated to computer forensics. Beware of anyone using forensic computers to receive e-mail, surf the web, or use for their child’s homework preparation. Experienced computer forensic companies regularly use fifty or more software applications to insure the correct results.

Submitted reports should be in lay terms, not heavily embedded with computer forensic jargon and techie-terms that will be difficult for the jury to understand.

A computer forensic examiner’s expert witness experience should be for both sides of the table, plaintiff and defense. Too often experts are accused of being a witness for only one side or the other, thus insinuating that they are bought and paid for, rather than an independent expert.

Popularity: 70% [?]

Share This