Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Computer Forensics Docket Sheet
Court Orders Gov't To Give Defendant
Hard Drive Mirror Image
In a criminal proceeding, the government seized the defendant's computer to search for evidence that the defendant unlawfully transferred obscene pictures over the Internet. After the seizure, the defendant requested that the government provide him with a mirror image of his computer hard drive to allow his computer forensics expert to examine the drive for potential evidence. In an affidavit, the forensics expert declared he planned to form an opinion, based on his examination of the hard drive, as to whether the defendant knowingly received the obscene images. The expert stated that a mirror image was necessary so he could perform his analysis in his own laboratory, using his own computer forensics software and hardware, which might be difficult to transport to another location. The government objected, declaring the defense forensics expert could review the mirror image only under its supervision. Determining that the hard drive could contain relevant dates, times and circumstances surrounding the receipt of the pictures, the court ordered the government to produce the mirror image. United States v. Alexander, 2004 WL 2095701 (E.D.Mich. Sept. 14, 2004).
Michele C.S. Lange Charity Delich E-Discovery Case Law Update Computer Forensics www.krollontrack.com e-Discovery Law & Strategy [email protected]
Court Orders Gov't To Give Defendant
Hard Drive Mirror Image
In a criminal proceeding, the government seized the defendant's computer to search for evidence that the defendant unlawfully transferred obscene pictures over the Internet. After the seizure, the defendant requested that the government provide him with a mirror image of his computer hard drive to allow his computer forensics expert to examine the drive for potential evidence. In an affidavit, the forensics expert declared he planned to form an opinion, based on his examination of the hard drive, as to whether the defendant knowingly received the obscene images. The expert stated that a mirror image was necessary so he could perform his analysis in his own laboratory, using his own computer forensics software and hardware, which might be difficult to transport to another location. The government objected, declaring the defense forensics expert could review the mirror image only under its supervision. Determining that the hard drive could contain relevant dates, times and circumstances surrounding the receipt of the pictures, the court ordered the government to produce the mirror image. United States v. Alexander, 2004 WL 2095701 (E.D.Mich. Sept. 14, 2004).
Michele C.S. Lange Charity Delich E-Discovery Case Law Update Computer Forensics www.krollontrack.com e-Discovery Law & Strategy [email protected]
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Blockchain Domains: New Developments for Brand Owners
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.