Abstract
The paper investigates how digital forensic (DF) practitioners approach examiner objectivity and evidence reliability during DF investigations. Fifty-three DF practitioners responded to a questionnaire concerning these issues after first receiving a scenario, contextual information, and a task description and then examining an evidence file. The survey showed that hypotheses played an important role in how the DF practitioners handled contextual information before the analysis and safeguarding objectivity during the analysis. Dual tool verification was the most frequently referred measure for controlling evidence reliability. The analysis of responses revealed three significant causes of concern. First, 45% started the analysis without an innocence hypothesis in mind. Second, 34% applied no techniques to maintain their objectivity during the analysis. Third, 38% did not use any techniques to examine or control evidence reliability. The paper provides insights into how DF investigations are carried out in practice. These insights are essential for the DF community to guide the development of procedures that safeguard fair investigations and effective error mitigation strategies.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
