Introduction
Technological advancement is inevitable in our current society. It has aided in improving a myriad of facets of our contemporary world. For instance, transport and communication have evolved to their current reality as compared to before, as people can either travel to far-off places or even communicate with people from miles away. Nonetheless, computer technology has its fair share of disadvantages. This essay seeks to illuminate more about computer technology’s pros and cons regarding criminal activities and investigations.
Advantages of using Computers/Software in Investigations
Computer technology offers criminal investigators both speed and efficiency. Unlike the capabilities of human investigators and prosecutors, computers can process data more swiftly, which helps them quickly examine and sort through information. Moreover, computers are not prone to making mistakes, ensuring that the information they relay is accurate and hence more reliable. Similarly, computer technology utilizes machine learning and statistical algorithms to identify suspects most susceptible to committing crimes (Choi et al., 2020). Such technology has even made it possible to identify areas that are highly prone to crime and prioritize particular leads over others.
Previously, investigators had to store information about criminal suspects in printed papers, which made it considerably easier to sort through information about culprits with criminal records. Computer technology also facilitates communication between criminal investigators, which has made it easier to collaborate on related cases in real time. Initially, solving some criminal cases was slightly more intricate because of the lack of sufficient evidence that could be considered admissible in a court of law (Choi et al., 2020). Such cases often involved lawbreakers who committed crimes in different states on different chronological periods, making it difficult to pin crimes on them. Fortunately, digital technology now enables law enforcers to access a centralized database of every person in the country with a criminal history, making connecting lawbreakers with their respective crimes easier.
Cons of Law Enforcement Concerning the Advancements of Computers
Unfortunately, the seamless execution of digital technology activities can make one less detail-oriented than before. Too much computer dependence can make criminal investigators neglect their decision-making skills and critical thinking capabilities. Similarly, when criminal investigators are overly reliant on computer technology, it may be difficult to sort between relevant and irrelevant data (Geluvaraj et al., 2019). It is expensive for criminal investigative agencies to acquire and maintain digital computer technology as digital software and hardware advance quickly.
It is imperative to understand that while criminal prosecutors advance their prowess in using digital technology, the same applies to cybercriminals. It is salient for law enforcers to remain professional so that they not only be competitive but also practice restrain. Law enforcement agencies must be assertive about how much data they collect on citizens under digital observation. Computer technology poses privacy issues in scenarios where government surveillance becomes overly ambitious and collects far more information than the constitutional jurisdiction allows.
Multiple instances have proved that it can be rather intricate for law enforcers to keep up with some cybercriminals who keep inventing new felonious strategies over time. Also, it may be difficult for law enforcement agencies to hire and retain employees with the technical knowledge required to utilize and maintain sophisticated computer systems. It is particularly imperative to avoid instances where algorithms are set up wrong leading to unanticipated problems (Geluvaraj et al., 2019). Moreover, digital hardware and software must be maintained to avoid unnecessary technical issues.
A Case Where a Computer Aided in a Criminal Activity
The Capital One data breach in 2019 is one concrete example of how digital technology was used to commit a criminal offense. Paige Thompson, a former computer programmer, got into Capital One’s systems and stole the private information of nearly one hundred million clients (In Re Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach, 2020). She gained entry to the company’s data due to a compromised firewall in its cloud-computing infrastructure. Thompson then uploaded the hacked information on a criminal platform on the Dark Web, where other felons could buy it.
The stolen information during this incident included Capital One clients’ names, addresses, credit ratings, and account numbers. The data also included other sensitive data, such as Social Security numbers, dates of birth, and reported incomes. Due to Paige’s digital behavior, including gloating about the hack on social media, the authorities were able to hunt her down. Paige Thompson was eventually incarcerated for five years for her crime. This particular data breach emphasizes the significance of adequate cybersecurity measures and the need for firms to be diligent in securing their clients’ information.
A Case Where a Computer Used in a Criminal Prosecution
An excellent example of the use of computer evidence in a criminal prosecution is the case of the U.S. versus Nosal. Korn Ferry International workers were prosecuted for trade secret infringement, conspiracy, and illegally accessing a secured computer system (US v. Nosal, 2016). The prosecution based its case on material evidence from the defendants’ devices, including e-mails and documents proving they accessed Korn Ferry’s database after leaving the company to start a rival venture. Mitchell and Nosal claimed they had a legal right to use the data they learned while working from their employer. However, the court determined that their unlawful entry to the computer network was illegal and that the intelligence they collected was worth more than $10 million. The offenders were found guilty and sentenced to jail time.
Conclusion
Digital technology could have positive or negative repercussions depending on how it is used. Therefore, it is important for law enforcement agencies and all affiliated parties to be assertive about their use of technology. Enforcement officers should remain competitive in service delivery to ensure that cyber criminals do not outmatch them. Law enforcers must also practice due diligence to avoid incidences of overly ambitious mass surveillance.
References
Choi, K.-S., Lee, C. S., & Louderback, E. R. (2020). Historical evolutions of cybercrime: From computer crime to cybercrime. The Palgrave Handbook of International Cybercrime and Cyberdeviance, 27–43.
Geluvaraj, B., Satwik, P., & Ashok Kumar, T. (2019). The future of cybersecurity: Major role of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning in cyberspace. 739–747.
In Re Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach, 488 F. Supp. 3d 374 (Dist. Court, ED Virginia 2020).
U.S. v. Nosal, 844 F. 3d 1024 (Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2016).