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]
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.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.