Digital evidence exceptionalism? A review and discussion of conceptual hurdles in digital evidence transformation
Fiche du document
28 août 2020
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2020.08.004
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pissn/2589-871X
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/SNF//BSSGI0_155809///
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/urn/urn:nbn:ch:serval-BIB_2D70F52A6C506
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess , CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 , https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Sujets proches
ProofCiter ce document
Alex Biedermann et al., « Digital evidence exceptionalism? A review and discussion of conceptual hurdles in digital evidence transformation », Serveur académique Lausannois, ID : 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2020.08.004
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
Forensic science is currently undergoing a transformation and expansion to include modern types of evidence, such as evidence generated by digital investigations. This development is said to raise a series of challenges, both in operational and conceptual dimensions. This paper reviews and discusses a series of convoluted conceptual hurdles that are encountered in connection with the use of digital evidence as part of evidence and proof processes at trial, in contradistinction to investigative uses of such types of evidence. As a recent example raising such hurdles, we analyse and discuss assertions and proposals made in the article “Digital Evidence Certainty Descriptors (DECDs)” by Graeme Horsman (32 Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation (2020) 200896).