In wake of Horizon scandal, forensics prof says digital evidence is a minefield
Digital forensics in the UK is under scrutiny, with experts calling for reform as the government seeks feedback on computer evidence rules. Peter Sommer, professor at the University of Birmingham, highlights significant concerns surrounding the reliability of digital evidence, notably as responses to the infamous Horizon IT scandal continue to influence legal frameworks.
Key Points
- Peter Sommer argues the need for a review of digital evidence practices due to multiple converging issues.
- The Horizon scandal highlights the long-standing presumption that computer evidence is inherently reliable.
- Digital evidence extraction methods are often problematic, risking the integrity of the evidence.
- Non-standardised processes for collecting evidence from online platforms can lead to unreliable results.
- Research indicates that unintentional bias can influence the evidence-gathering process.
- Sommer proposes a code of practice to define standards for evidence collection and presentation.
Why should I read this?
If you’re in any sector that interacts with digital evidence—law, tech, or research—this piece is a must-read. Sommer’s insights not only shine a spotlight on potential discrepancies in evidential practices but also provoke thought about how we handle digital data in court. It’s vital for anyone looking to navigate the murky waters of digital forensics today. We’ve saved you the hassle of sifting through the details!