Defend a plaintiff accused of a computer crime with cyber evidence
It would be appropriate to highlight the fact that evidence should not be viewed as admissible because of issues with validity. It is imperative to ensure that arguments are convincing. The defense attorney may note that presented pieces are related to the incident, but it is possible to argue with such statements. It is necessary to draw attention to the fact that presented evidence is not comprehensive.
Additionally, it is reasonable to question the consistency and explain the ways in which the information may be manipulated to benefit the accuser (Sammons, 2012). The focus on believability is of utmost importance. A system forensic expert must voice his or her concerns about the reliability of presented evidence. It is important to utilize the knowledge and discredit the arguments (Casey, 2011).
Evidence must be linked to the incident and plaintiff to be regarded valid. Moreover, it must be supported by other pieces to be considered by the jury (Easttom, 2014). Overall, the lack of information is quite problematic in this case and can be viewed as a disadvantage, but it is possible to provide a set of arguments that would prove that evidence does not meet the criteria and should not be reviewed.
Refuting the credibility of District Attorney’s forensic witness
First of all, a person that tries to interfere with such procedures as collection and make inappropriate statements should not be trusted. Additionally, any attempts to influence the transportation should be viewed as questionable. It is paramount to take all the necessary measures to guarantee the safety of collected evidence, and it is reasonable to monitor the actions of forensic witnesses in such cases to ensure that they are appropriate.
Such factors as aggressive marketing could be used to refute their credibility. A use of statements that suggest advocacy is inappropriate, and could have an enormous impact on the way a professional is perceived. Any personal interest is not acceptable in such situations, and it is reasonable to review previous cases. Suggestions made by forensic witnesses that show the lack of knowledge when conducting the analysis should not be viewed as reliable.
Moreover, it is import to question their judgment if some of the statements are not aligned with presented evidence (Wall, 2009). Also, it is necessary to draw attention towards inconsistencies in arguments. Presentation of facts that contradict each other is also an outstanding opportunity to discredit a forensic witness (Bowers, 2013). Overall, it is important to determine the weaknesses that such professionals have and focus on areas that are most problematic.
Qualities of a forensic witness
Any bias should be viewed as extremely dangerous because a forensic expert may try to take all measures necessary to prove his or her position. Also, a professional that is too worried about their track record could manipulate the terms to support their statements. Excessive confidence can be regarded a dangerous sign because one may try to use a broad range of techniques to sound convincing. Ability to provide prompt and comprehensive answers to all the questions also could affect the outcome of the case.
An experienced forensic expert will know how to act during cross-examination, and it is a significant threat to the defense because it is too reliant on standard questioning most of the time (Wall, 2009). Utilization of tactics and strategies that are not commonly used also should warn the defense and must be taken into account. Overall, it is necessary to understand that forensic witness has an enormous influence in the courtroom, and it is crucial to be aware of approaches that help to refute the arguments.
References
Bowers, C. M. (2013). Forensic testimony: Science, law and expert evidence. Burlington, MA: Academic Press.
Casey, E. (2011). Digital evidence and computer crime: Forensic science, computers and the Internet (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Jones & Barlett Learning.
Easttom, C. (2014). System forensics, investigation, and response (2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Sammons, J. (2012). The basics of digital forensics: The primer for getting started in digital forensics. New York, NY: Elsevier Publishing.
Wall, W. (2009). Forensic science in court: The role of the expert witness. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.