9 - Human factors

Abstract

From the beginning of digital evidence’s formation as a discipline, it has been generally considered to be fact-based evidence. Although anecdotal, conversations with stakeholders within the justice system, including members of the judiciary revealed a continued widespread belief that digital evidence is still considered to be fact-based as that is the way that it has been presented in court, which has remained unchallenged by defence counsel. While the assertion that digital evidence is fact based has always been erroneous and without foundation, that assertion could now quite rightly be considered to be a fallacy. Research on miscarriages of justice in multiple jurisdictions has highlighted the prevalent issue of human error in forensic science, with a particular focus on cognitive bias in several forensic disciplines. In recent years, digital forensics has increasingly taken a more scientific approach to analysis and interpretation of evidence accompanied by an increased focus on quality management, error mitigation, tool testing and verification methodologies. A growing number of peak organisations and professional bodies recognise digital evidence as a discipline of forensic science and, therefore, are subject to uncertainties, vulnerabilities, limitations and the potential for error in a similar way to other forensic disciplines.