Forensic Science Standards Research Articles

The Significance of Computer Forensics in Electronic Documents as Evidence in Criminal Law

Forensic science standards, no crime never leaves traces. Along with the emergence of cybercrime, a new type of evidence emerged as an expansion of conventional evidence in Indonesian criminal procedural law, namely electronic evidence as stated in the Law on Electronic Information or electronic documents whose authenticity can be guaranteed, but there is no further explanation. Further, what is the procedure for guaranteeing its authenticity? Based on this, not all electronic information or documents can be used as evidence. One branch of forensic science that is relevant to proving cybercrimes is computer forensics. The problem that arises is to what extent is the significance of computer forensics to guarantee electronic information or electronic documents as evidence. This article was based on legal research using a conceptual, statutory, and case approach. The result of this study is that computer forensics plays a significant role in the crime of illegal access to electronic devices because it is a tool in criminal procedural law that can be used to guarantee the authenticity of electronic information or electronic documents so that they can be accepted as evidence in court.How to cite item: Hardinanto, Aris, Barda Nawawi Arief, and Joko Setiyono. “The Significance of Computer Forensics in Electronic Documents as Evidence in Criminal Law.” Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum 14 no. 2 (2023):155-166. DOI: doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v14i2.10820.

Promoting transparency in forensic science by integrating categorical and evaluative reporting through decision theory

Forensic science standards often require the analyst to report in categorical terms. Categorical reporting without reference to the strength of the evidence, or the strength threshold that must be met to sustain or justify the decision, obscures the decision-making process, and allows for inconsistency and bias. Standards that promote reporting in probabilistic terms require the analyst to report the strength of the evidence without offering a conclusive interpretation of the evidence. Probabilistic reporting is often based on a likelihood ratio which depends on calibrated probabilities. While probabilistic reporting may be more objective and less open to bias than categorical reporting, the report can be difficult for a lay jury to interpret. These reporting methods may appear disparate, but the relationship between the two is easily understood and visualized by a simple decision theory construct known as the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Implementing ROC-facilitated reporting through an expanded proficiency testing regime may provide transparency in categorical reporting and potentially obviate some of the lay jury interpretation issues associated with probabilistic reporting.

The unwanted effects of imprecise language in forensic science standards

The author has previously contributed to work on requirements definitions in digital forensic methods, and identified a potential gap which could not be fully explained at the time (Marshall and Paige, 2018). The former Forensic Science Regulator (FSR), with others, commented on this and challenged the finding (Tully et al., 2020). This paper re-addresses this issue and explores the issue of language used in the various standards from ISO/IEC 17 025 (2017) through to the FSR's own guidance on digital forensic method (Forensic Science Regulator, 2020), comparing it with language used in other related standards and in software engineering standards. From this, the author proposes that the language used by the FSR may cause an over-emphasis on establishing requirements for the ultimate end-user, to the detriment of requirements for purely internal use of processes. This can also result in overly complex methods, which are inherently difficult to fully validate, being produced. Furthermore, the use of overloaded terminology may also lead to confusion about some key concepts in the various stages of method validation and re-validation.

Implementation of Forensic Science Standards in Operational Laboratories: Mission Possible or Impossible?

Implementation of Forensic Science Standards in Operational Laboratories: Mission Possible or Impossible?

The Society for Wildlife Forensic Science standards and guidelines

The Society for Wildlife Forensic Science standards and guidelines

Evaluation and Countermeasures of the Implementation of Forensic Clinical Identification Standards Based on the Perspective of Accreditation.

The new Standardization Law, implemented in 2018, has added a standard post-implementation evaluation system, aiming to continuously improve the quality of standards through post-implementation evaluation. Standards in the forensic science field are closely related to accreditation activities. Forensic science standards are not only the criteria on which accreditation activities are carried out, but also one of the key contents of the inspection of forensic science institutions in accreditation activities. Since 2018, the certification and accreditation policies in the forensic science field have also been changed, which has brought impacts on the construction of a standard system based on accreditation.This paper analyzes the standard data from China National Accreditation Center from Conformity Assessment on forensic clinical identification accreditation assessment. It points out that the current coverage of laboratory accreditation activities is limited, the development in different provinces is unbalanced, and there is overlap and crossover in the standards in use. It is emphasized that the construction of the national forensic science standardization technical committee, the improvement of the forensic science standard system, the establishment of the standard implementation evaluation index system, and promotion of the coordination of standards, and the certifications and accreditations should be accelerated, in order to continue to promote the standardization and accreditation activities in the field of forensic science.

Analysis on applicability evaluation of forensic science standards in China

Standard applicability is the ability of a standard to be suitable for the prescriptive purpose under specified conditions. There is no mature applicability-evaluation index system of standards worldwide at present. We aim to construct the index system for evaluating the applicability of forensic science standard. The index system of applicability evaluation is proposed using a statistical analysis on the applicability of forensic science standards in China. We summarize the major problems and reasons in developing and revising the national and industry standards in China. Based on these, we put forward measures to improve standards' applicability, provide policy support for rectifying the standards, and lay the theoretical foundation for the construction, adjustment, and optimization of the forensic science standard system.

Recent activities in the United States involving the National Commission on Forensic Science and the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science

In 2013, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced an interagency initiative to strengthen forensic science: the establishment of a National Commission on Forensic Science (NCFS) and development of the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC). The role of NCFS is to advise DOJ on matters of policy. NCFS exists in two-year renewable terms and has held 11 meetings in Washington, DC between February 2014 and September 2016. More than 30 work products have been approved following discussion and development within seven NCFS subcommittees that have been informed by public comment. The role of OSAC is to improve forensic practices by facilitating the development and promulgation of technically sound consensus-based documentary standards that can be used by accrediting bodies in future audits of forensic laboratories. OSAC is a NIST-organised effort and it is intended to be ongoing. Since the first in-person meeting in January 2015, OSAC has grown to involve a Forensic Science Standards Board, three resource committees, five SACs, 25 subcommittees, and >200 task groups involving hundreds of people from the forensic science and research communities. This article reviews recent activities, challenges and progress of NCFS and OSAC.

The development of forensic entomology in Australia and New Zealand: an overview of casework practice, quality control and standards

Forensic entomology has a rich history in Australia and New Zealand, and was first used in the region at least 90 years ago. Since then, there has been ongoing research and casework in both countries by at least 11 practitioners. Workers have been employed by universities, agricultural institutions, and forensic science providers. The forces driving the implementation of standards in the region are personal experience, regional dialogue, general forensic science standards, institutional standards, and court room conflict. The influence of these on current practice is discussed with particular reference to south-eastern Australia.

Accreditation of forensic laboratories as a part of the “European Forensic Science 2020” concept in countries of the Visegrad Group

Globalising, cross-border crime has led EU Member States to improve methods of fighting crime on an international level as well as to increase the mutual recognition of collecting and analysing evidence by one another. In the interest of the regulated and scheduled implementation of the harmonization process, the Council of the EU made a decision of The Vision for European Forensic Science 2020 including the creation of a European Forensic Science Area and the development of forensic science infrastructure in Europe [EFSA 2020] to ensure the equivalence of professional forensic examinations. The collection, processing, use and delivery of forensic data will be based on equivalent minimum forensic science standards, and forensic service providers will work on the basis of a common approach to implement these standards that foster closer cooperation between them and criminal justice systems. The accreditation of forensic laboratories is a corner stone of the above mentioned objectives [1–3]. Ensuring the integrity of DNA profiles the Council issued decision 2008/616/JHA the application of EN ISO/IEC 17025 standard regarding the operation of testing and calibration laboratories has been ordered [4]. According to Council Framework Decision 2009/905/JHA on the accreditation of judicial expert laboratories, the laboratories have to be accredited until 30th November 2015 [5]. We investigated the regulations, decisions and rules national and international measures of the given area.

U.S. initiatives to strengthen forensic science & international standards in forensic DNA

A number of initiatives are underway in the United States in response to the 2009 critique of forensic science by a National Academy of Sciences committee. This article provides a broad review of activities including efforts of the White House National Science and Technology Council Subcommittee on Forensic Science and a partnership between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to create the National Commission on Forensic Science and the Organization of Scientific Area Committees. These initiatives are seeking to improve policies and practices of forensic science. Efforts to fund research activities and aid technology transition and training in forensic science are also covered.The second portion of the article reviews standards in place or in development around the world for forensic DNA. Documentary standards are used to help define written procedures to perform testing. Physical standards serve as reference materials for calibration and traceability purposes when testing is performed. Both documentary and physical standards enable reliable data comparison, and standard data formats and common markers or testing regions are crucial for effective data sharing. Core DNA markers provide a common framework and currency for constructing DNA databases with compatible data. Recent developments in expanding core DNA markers in Europe and the United States are discussed.

Overview of the Organization of Scientific Area Committees

The National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) has transformed the majority of the Scientific Working Groups (SWGs) into the Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC). The OSAC has been created to foster the development of standards and guidelines for the practice of documenting evidence by methods that are technically sound and accepted by the consensus of forensic practitioners. The OSAC is composed of 33 committees arranged in a hierarchy. Potential standards begin in a Subcommittee and must work their way through approval by the Subcommittee, the Subcommittee's parent Scientific Area Committee (SAC), and finally the Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) before being adopted into the FSSB Registry of Approved Standards. NIST hopes to find existing standards with technical merit that were developed through a standards development process for adoption as national standards of practice. The OSAC provides forensic scientists the unprecedented opportunity of validating their own scientific practices within the framework of sound scientific practice.

The future of forensic science standards

In 2010 the Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency National Institute of Forensic Science (NIFS) established a project to set up a sustainable mechanism for the development and maintenance of standards, across a broad science and technology base that is relevant to general law enforcement, and the forensic science community. The project includes four core forensic standards covering the collection, analysis, interpretation and reporting of forensic evidence and discipline specific standards. One specific standard identified covers specifications regarding the manufacture of products used to collect biological material for forensic analysis. This is significant as contamination events caused by staff during the manufacturing process have resulted in investigations being hampered by non-case related DNA profiles obtained during case work analysis. The core standards continue to be developed as Australian Standards, however the contamination minimisation standard is being progressed through ISO. The development of the standards and potential impact is discussed.

Forensic science standards in fast-changing environments

Regulatory trends in forensic science point strongly to the need for exhaustive testing of all findings and tools. At the same time a number ofjurisdictions suggest ajudicial test for the admissibility of novel scientific evidence. But in fields such as computers and cellphones, the rate of change is faster than the normal times required for peer-reviewed publication. One route to admitting less-than-perfect findings from forensic science is via a reevaluation of the role of expert evidence and in particular pre-trial meetings between experts.

Forensic Science Standards: Where They Come From and How They Are Used

This article provides a brief history of standardization in the forensic sciences, describes the current sources of these standards, and addresses how the standards promulgated by various organizations fit into the quality-assurance program of the forensic-science laboratory. The value of using voluntary consensus standards is described, and a table listing all of the voluntary consensus standards promulgated by ASTM Committee E 30 on Forensic Sciences is provided.