In the field of computer researchers,
as in the legal field, the procedures in civil cases are different from those in the criminal justice system. Data collection and presentation of evidence may be held at different levels, the process of data collection and reasoning is likely to be very different, and the trial results can have very different effects.
A few quick explanations may be in order.
Criminal law deals with charges against the state – the prosecution of an alleged criminal. Such cases can include crime against a person. A government body, or a representative of a governmental organization is suing the person who makes the case, and state resources are brought to trial. The consequences of a crime can result in a fine, imprisonment, imprisonment, or death.
Political law covers everything else, such as the breach of contracts and litigation between two or more parties. A person who is lost in such a dispute often provides payment, goods or services to the existing party. Imprisonment is not a problem in civil cases.
As a result, the standard of proof is not as high in civil cases as in criminal cases.
For a computer law expert who specializes in law enforcement, a certain amount of extra care should be taken from collecting data and producing results, because the quality of evidence is high. There are benefits to the latter in data collection, however. Because when a court authorizes a search warrant, a police officer (and probably not so much) with a badge and a gun can seize the complainant’s computer in surprise and power. When a computer is captured and illustrated, all information is available and may lead to the accuser.
On the contrary, in a civil case, there is often a lot of discussions about which computers and which data to review, and where and when. It is unlikely that there will be a hostage of computers, and for a long time it may happen between the time the computer test request is made and the time the computer is made to be monitored. It is common for one party to access a very limited area of data from another party’s computer.
During this time, the respondent may take the opportunity to try to hide or destroy the data. The author has had several cases where the required computer for analysis was destroyed before the respondent had the opportunity to examine it. Such attempts to conceal data are often discovered by a digital intelligence machine, which may expose evidence of some such evil to the expert witness.
Opportunities for ways to learn and interact with other professionals may also vary.
While some pre-programmed computer software and training, such as Access FTK, EnCase, or SMART Forensics are available to many who can pay, others, such as iLook are only available to law enforcement and military personnel. While the majority of supporters and professional organizations and groups are available to all, others, such as the High Technology Crime Investigation Association (HTCIA) are open to professionals who provide crime prevention (with few exceptions).
Where lawyers have a case involving computer screening,
the purpose is to obtain sufficient information to convict the accused in court, where the standard of information presented is very similar. From the moment digital or Hardware data is captured and received, the Rules of Evidence should be kept in mind (Cornell University has complete and voluminous code on its website).
Law enforcement personnel must follow acceptable procedures or evidence may be released. Data recovery and criminal prosecution must often follow rigorous and separate procedures depending on whether the jurisdiction is governed by a state, state, or municipality and occasionally depends on the judge’s preference.