Forensic Procedures for Device Evidence- Collection and Processing Methods in Compliance with Fourth and Fifth Amendment Guidelines
The Cybercrime Prevention Law of 2012 is the first cybercrime law that aims to persecute and sentence cybercriminals. The law takes into consideration that data can be private and sensitive, and the infringement of this privacy is a crime. The cybercrime law also allows authorities from different countries to collaborate with each other considering the trans-border nature of cybercrime. Cybercrime has become a global menace, with organizations losing both valuable information and money. Cybercrime does not have to take place online or using computers but instead can be described as a crime that was performed with the aid of a computing device. Even if a computer was used only in planning and communicating, the crime qualifies to be classified as cybercrime (Kleijssen & Perri, 2017). This paper will analyze the steps that should be undertaken in order to handle and present data for the prosecution of cybercrime successfully.
The suspect being prosecuted was apprehended after 2.5 tons of explosive materials were found in the suspect’s possession. It is suspected that this explosive material was used in the making of illegal fireworks. The explosive material is considered highly dangerous, and the entire operation needs to be shut down before more damage or loss of life can occur. The PDA and laptop recovered during the arrest are essential pieces of evidence since they can provide important information such as the origin of the explosives and their purpose.
In the persecution of a cybercrime, three main steps should be undertaken: imaging and acquisition, analysis, and finally, reporting (Nadeem, Saeed & Ahmed, 2020). In our particular case, the evidence obtained includes a palmtop and computer taken from the suspect’s household. The evidence was collected during the suspect’s arrest, making the devices viable and valuable evidence before the court. Considering the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, the suspect might claim to have their privacy violated if their electronic devices are accessed by bypassing their passwords or any other security feature on the devices. However, the prosecution can argue that the evidence was acquired within the direct vicinity of the arrest. The devices, once in custody, were clearly held proof that would be useful in the prosecution of the suspect. Hence, the prosecution had enough cause to break into the electronic devices.
The Fourth Amendment is a correction to the American Constitution that gives every citizen the right to expect privacy and prevent the seizure of property without a warrant. However, the amendment allows government officers to search and seize evidence that is in the immediate vicinity of an individual who is being arrested. The reasoning is that a weapon might be stashed nearby and used to harm government officials. A judge who writes a warrant is not allowed to be part of the investigating team, or the warranty becomes void. An officer is also allowed to search a premises if there are imitated signs of a crime or if the officer receives permission from the client (Tokson, 2020). The Fifth Amendment is another modification to the American constitution that prevents an individual from testifying against themselves. An individual is also protected from being prosecuted twice for the same crime. All individuals under the amendment have the right to a fair and just prosecution as well as judgment. The Fifth Amendment also allows the prosecuted to choose to remain silent during the proceedings in order not to incriminate them (Sacharoff, 2018).
The first step in the prosecution and handling of evidence is analyzing the crime scene (Castelo et al., 2021), which was performed and led to the discovery of multiple electronic devices that can be used to obtain evidence in the prosecution of the case against the suspect. The next step in the process is the seizure of the evidence, which was performed once the evidence was obtained. The electronic devices were taken into the possession of the prosecution department. The suspect still has the right to privacy of their data, and as a result, the contents of these electronic devices cannot be exposed to individuals who are not on the prosecution of the particular suspect who owns the devices. The data on the devices that are not relevant to the trial of the case must remain private and not be used in the case as evidence. If possible, before the devices are accessed, the suspect in custody should be asked to provide authority to search the contents of their electronic devices. If the suspect accepts, all the information on the devices can then easily be used as evidence without having to explain why the devices or any data will act as evidence. If the suspect, on the other hand, refuses, the prosecution can still use the evidence but with justification as to why the evidence should be considered and not disbanded. Since explosive materials were found in high amounts during the arrest, there is a reasonable indication that there could be evidence such as conversations with other members of the illegal operations where the explosive materials were sourced from and their final destination. The evidence will be considered valid and usable in court.
Once all the evidence has been taken by the prosecution, the next step is to label each piece of evidence that will be used in the trial. Then finally, the prosecution has to piece together how each piece of evidence fits into the case and how the prosecution can use it against the suspect. This will require a multidisciplinary team that will put their skills together in order better to understand the suspect’s motive and plan of action. Once all the information has been collected, a report must be written. All the evidence will be recorded in this report; the order of actions relating to the crime is chronologically arranged for easy understanding. The evidence and report are then placed in a secure facility awaiting trial of the case against the suspect.
Conclusion
In conclusion, arrests and evidence collection in the United States of America have to be performed according to the procedure or risk the evidence or the entire case being thrown out of court. In order for the prosecution to be effective, they must perform due diligence and ensure they follow all the rules regarding making arrests and collecting evidence. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments provide American citizens with rights that prevent the government through its officers from harassing or exploiting citizens’ privacy
References
Castelo Gómez, J. M., Carrillo Mondéjar, J., Roldán Gómez, J., & Martínez Martínez, J. L. (2021). A context-centered methodology for IoT forensic investigations. International Journal of Information Security, 20(5), 647-673.
Kleijssen, J., & Perri, P. (2017). Cybercrime, evidence and territoriality: Issues and options. In Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2016 (pp. 147-173). TMC Asser Press, The Hague.
Nadeem, K., Saeed, N., & Ahmed, N. (2020). A Comparative Study of Digital Forensics and Cybercrime Investigation.
Sacharoff, L. (2018). Unlocking the Fifth Amendment: Passwords and Encrypted Devices. Fordham L. Rev., 87, 203.
Tokson, M. (2020). The emerging principles of Fourth Amendment privacy. Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 88, 1.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
Assignment Description
A forensic unit within a federal crime lab has been tasked with the investigation of an individual who is suspected of the manufacturing, transportation, and sale of illegal fireworks explosives. Upon responding to a fire at the suspect’s house, firefighters discover 2.5 tons of explosives and, therefore, put out the fire from a distance.
Forensic Procedures for Device Evidence- Collection and Processing Methods in Compliance with Fourth and Fifth Amendment Guidelines
When investigators arrive on the scene, several networked computers, PDAs, cell phones, and laptops are found in an upstairs office. As junior investigators, they are unsure of how the Fourth and Fifth Amendments will affect their investigation, search warrants, and the ultimate seizure of these devices. In addition, they are unsure of the standard operating procedures for processing computer evidence within the First and Fourth Amendments’ governance, so AB Investigative Services (ABIS) has been contracted to provide guidance in these areas.
Provide a 4–6 page document describing the forensics procedures to collect and process forensic evidence from these devices while following the Fourth and Fifth Amendment guidelines.