Digital evidence exceptionalism? A review and discussion of conceptual hurdles in digital evidence transformation

Abstract

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).

A Multi-Layer Semantic Approach for Digital Forensics Automation for Online Social Networks

“…However, the process is causing several operational and conceptual challenges. The papers by Biedermann and Kotsoglou [ 22 ] and Stoyanova et al [ 4 ] reviewed and discussed a series of convoluted conceptual hurdles experienced in linkage with the use of digital evidence as part of the evidence and proof processes at trial. The significant artefacts needed in forensic examination and collection are diverse and dissimilar from the device-based analysis in online networks.…”

Crowdsourcing forensics: Creating a curated catalog of digital forensic artifacts

“…Furthermore, practitioners and decision makers can benefit from a means to assess the interpretation of digital evidence and its reliability [6]. Assessing reliability in a forensic context depends on a deeper shared understanding of digital artifacts and associated meanings, often coming in the form of peer review and past experience.…”