ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
Insert your name
Course:
University affiliation:
February 7nd, 2018
E-Evidence
In an age where almost everything has gone digital, or simply most information is found in its electronic format, it is mandatory that the judicial system adopt this information as one source of evidence. That being said, for the electronic evidence to be admissible in a court of law, the object of the rule of thediscovery of such evidence ought to be taken into account. With this regard, it is important to note here that the object of discovery for such evidence is to bring both parties at the same level with respect to all obtained and documented evidence before the commencement of the court proceedXXXX (Hall v MultilateralMotor Vehicle XXXXXXXXX Fund 1998 (X) XX 195 (X) XX XXXX-X). This means that all XXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX XX familiarized with XXXX evidence XX XXXXXXXX by XXX object XX XXX XXXX XX discovery (XXXXXXX, 2012).
Depending on XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX, the concept of the rule of XXXXXXXXX has XXXX XXXXXXX differently. As XXXX, it XX not XXXXXXXX to implicitly XXXXX XXXX XXXXX are XXX particular rules XX discovery for XXX e-XXXXXXXX since XXXX XXXXXXXX XXX change while XXXXXXXXXX one jurisdiction to the XXXXX. XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX such as the XX and Ireland XXXX XXX XX XXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXX of some XXXXX XXXXX such as the definition of the word ‘document’ so XXXX it XXXXXXXX for or XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX. XX understand XXXX scenario XXXXXX, XXXX XXXX account XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX. XXX United Kingdom XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX in XXXXX of XXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX of documents (XXXX 31). XXXX, XXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXX been defined extensively to encompass both the XXXXXXXXXXX in XXX XXXX format XXX XXXX anXXXXXXXXXX format that includes XXXXXX, social XXXXX accounts, word documents XXX other XXXXX of XXXX XXXXXXXXXX information (para XX.X). XXXXX from including XXXXXXXX-named XXXXXXXXX, XXX term XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX to XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX may be backed up XX servers and XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX.
XXXXX, almost XXXXX XXXX contains some form of electronic evidence from simple text XXXXXXXX XX more XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX data. It is XXXXXXXXX important that XXX investigators XXXXXXX XXXX XXX particular case be fully XXXXXXXX with XXX XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXXX and extracting such XXXXXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXXXXX by XXX help XX a digital forensic XXXXXX. XXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXX means knowing where to look and XXX what.
When XXXXXXXXXXX the electronic XXXXXXXX XXXX, there are some XXXXXXXXXX XXXX should XX XXXXXXXX or XXXXXXX (Enisa, 2013). These XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX adopted XX XXX XX XX a XXXXX to XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX are as follows;
Principle X- XXXXXXXXX of XXX XXXX
This XXXX states XXXX XX alteration should be XXXX XX XXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX XX XXXXX relied upon so as XX XXXXXXXXX the ruling XX a case.
Principle 2- the trail XX XXXXX
XXXX rule states that XXX the steps XXXX were XXXXXXXX XXXX collecting XXX XXXXXXXX should be XXXX documented. XXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXX fully independent third-party XX be able to XXXXXXX similar XXXXXXX.
XXXXXXXXX 3- the XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX
Electronic XXXXXXXX XXXXXX be collected XXXX the XXXX XX an XXXXXX. XXX expert XXXXXX have XXX the necessary skills required XXX should XX XXXX aware of the rules XXXXXXXXX XXX such XXXX identification XXX collection. XXX XXXXXXX involved should perform this task so as to ensure XXXX the XXXX or information XXXXX be admissible in the court XX XXX.
Principle X – XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX XXX data XXX been XXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXX extraction XXXX XXX scene or the gadgets, then XXX corresponding individuals should have XXXXXX skills XX carry out XXX task in XXXX XXX help XX an expert XXX XXX XXXXXXXXX XX XXXX.
Principle 5- Legality
This principle XXXXXX XXXX all the member states are responsible XXX XXXXXXXX that XXX required forensic XXXXXXXXXX have been XXXXXXXX to XXX letter XXX XXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX above XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXX for XXXX evidence in the court of XXX.
XXXXX are different XXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. This article shall just focus on a XXXXXX XX XXXXX devices.
Computers.
X XXXXXXXX is the XXXX XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. It maycontain different sets XX information that XXX XXXX from simple text documents to motion images or XXXXX XXXXXXX. While extracting XXXXXXXXXXX XXXX the computers, XXX XXXX consider consulting a XXXXXXXXXX whom XXX have XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX know-how XXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX system.
XXXXXXX.
A server is an XXXXXX storage XXXXX XXXX XX able XX store a lot XX information that XX later made available XX XXXXX XXXXXXX via an XXXXXXXX connection. Unlike a computer, a XXXXXX XXX contain some of the documents that XXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX by XXX XXXX.
Handhelds
This XXXXXXXX includes portable XXXXXX XXXXXX XXX also iPad. XXXX are simplyXXXX-XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXX XXXXXXXX. XXXX XXXXXXX the XXXX XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXXX stored XX the XXXXXXXXX.
Peripherals
These are devices that XXX attached to the XXXXXXXXX through XXX XXXXX available and mostly XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXX XX information. These may include USB XXXXXX and external XXXX XXXXXX.
XXXXXXX electronic evidence
All searches and seizures of the XXXXXXXXXX evidence are XXXXXXXX XX XXX Criminal Procedure Act (XXXX, XXXX). XXXX act XXXXXXXX XXXX a XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX be issued XX a district XXXXX allowing XXX investigators XX search and XXXXX electronic gadgets XXXXXXXXX to contain some form XX electronic XXXXXXXX. XX XXXXXXXXX to XXX XXX in 2011 XXXXX a number XX provisions so XX to assist XXXXXXX with the XXXXXX XXX XXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX. The amendment XXXXXX that there has to XX particularity with XXXXXXX XX XXX information XXX the XXXXXXX being seized. The information seized XXXXXXX should XXXXXXX be XXXXXX in XXXX XXXXXX or XXX XXXXXXXXXX copies. XXX gadgets XXXXXX XXXX be seized XX the information gathered is unfeasible XXXXXXX the seizure XX XXXX XXXXXXX.
XXXXX XXX successful seizure XX XXXX XXXX, XXX XXXXXXXXXXX should XX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXX with copies XX the XXXX data.
XXXX though the amended act XXX XXX fully XXXXXXX all XXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX available, proposals are XXXXX made to further amend XXX XXX so that it can XXXXXXX XXX XXX search XXX XXXXXXX XX XXXXXX computers and XXXXXXX with XXX XXXXXXXXX of third –part XXXXXXX.
Application XX e-XXXXXXXX in courts
XXX any electronic XXXXXXXX to be used in a XXXXXX, the XXXXXXXX must XXXX XXX standards XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX such evidence XXX by the XXXXX. When giving a ruling XX a case XXXX XX based XX e-XXXXXXXX, judges XXXX put XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX the XXXXX XXX provision (Pendleton, XXXX). For XXXX evidence to XX XXXXXXXX exploited, XXX question XX authentication always comes in XXXXX XXXXX such evidence XX prone to XXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXX parties. For this evidence XX be admissible, it XXX XX meet a XXXXXX of conditions as discussed XXXXX;
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX or XXXXXXXX.The purported XXXXXXXX XXXX XX proved XXXX it XXXXXX XX XXX original XXXXXXX that XXX XXXXXXXXX by XXX investigators. XXXXXXXXXXX, it XXX XX be proved that it XXXX from a reliable source XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX to XXX XXXXXXXXXX XX the plaintiff in the XXXXXXXXXX XXXX. XXX evidence XXXXXX further be XXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXX and XX XXXX XX inconsistencies.Not XXXXXXX. Hearsay XXXXXX XX XXX other XXXXXXXXXXX that XX provided in the court other XXXX by the XXXXXXXXX during XXXXXXXXX XXX is XXXXX at XXXXXXXX XXX asserting the matter XXXXXX XXX court. XXXXXXX is XXX XXXXXXXXXX unless in particular XXXXXXX cases.XX relevant. Relevant evidence refers to evidence that should XXXXXXX a consistency that tends to assert or affirm the existence XX XXX XXXX in XXXXXXXX. XXX particular fact XXXXX then XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX while XXXXXX a XXXXXX XXX XXXX the fact could be less or XXXX probable with or XXXXXXX the information.Should be non-XXXXXXXXXX communication.XXXXXXXXXX communication that XXXXXXXX XXXXXX-patient, husband-wife or even clergy-XXXXXXXXXX, XXX not XX deemed XXXXXXXX XXXXXX in the XXXX XXXXX such communication can be XXXXXX as XXXXXX.
XXX evidence XXX, XXXXXXXXX, be XXXXXX relevant and XXXXXXX to determine a XXXXXX XX it XXXXX the XXXXX standards.
Most cases XXXXXXXX XXXXX e-XXXXXXXX XXXXX a XXX XX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX. Even though XXXelectronic XXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX used in cyber-XXXXX cases, XXX former is XXXX that the XXXX approach XX XXXXX applied more and XXXX during the court proceedings.
XXXXXXXXXX
Joe XXX Dorsten (XXXX). Discovery of electronic documents XXX attorney’s XXXXXXXXXXX.Saflii. XXXXXXXXX XthFebruary, 2018 XXXXhttp://www.saflii.XXX/XX/journals/DEREBUS/XXXX/XX.html
XXXXX (2013.XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXX XX electronic-evidence.Enisa. Retrieved XthXXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXXhttps://XXX.enisa.europa.XX/XXXXXX/XXXXXXXXX-for-XXXXXXXXXXXXX-specialists/XXXXXX-XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXXX/XXXXXXXXX/identification-XXX-XXXXXXXX-XX-XXXXXXXXXX-evidence-handbook
Yoon & Yang (XXXX). XXXXXX XXX seizure of XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. XXXXXXXX. XXXXXXXXX 7thXXXXXXXX, XXXX fromXXXXX://www.XXXXXXXX.com/XXXXXXX/XXXXXX.XXXX?g=XXXXXXXX-f4e4-4157-XXXX-9c58ccfd9f7d
XXXXX XXXXXXXXX (2013). XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX: A new evidentiary frontier. XXXXX & Bar. Retrieved 7thFebruary, 2018 from
https://XXX.XXXXXXXXXX.XXX/XXXX/XX/admissibility-XX-electronic-XXXXXXXX