Frye And The Federal Rules Of Evidence Summary

elt the need to update the rules dealing with presentation of scientific evidence, and did so in the landmark ruling Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.This today is still the cited case when dealing with scientific evidence, but we must also observe what led up to Daubert, i.e. Frye and the Federal Rules of Evidence, to allow a greater understanding into the Computer Evidence v. Daubert discussion.
In 1923 in the case of Frye, where the evidence in question was that obtained from a device akin to a lie detector test, two important declarations were made by the court. Firstly, judges were awarded the role of gatekeeper having the power to determine what is and is not admissible as evidence. Secondly, it was established that if a scientific

However, the opinion of the court did not stop there. Justice Blackmun offered a four-pronged test, employed by most US States even today, which guide judges in assessing acceptance of scientific and technical evidence. The four questions asked, applying to methodology rather than conclusions, should be the following: has the theory or technique been reliably tested, has it been the subject of publications and peer review, what are, if any the known or potential error rates, and finally has the theory been generally accepted as a standard in the scientific community.
A few years later in 1999, the Court extended the scope of Daubert to cover technological expertise and to measure the methodology of technologists, thus making Computer Forensics fall within the ambit of the Daubert

In the former we find write blockers, and devices that interface with computer components. These can be easily tested and shown to operate correctly. The problem lies in the latter, where software tools are again sub-divided into closed and open sources.
A closed-source tool is one where the user is not purchasing software, but rather the right to use the software, involving a restriction of access to the original source code. Thus, forensic investigators, and also the courts, must trust that the vendor creating the software did so accurately, and has properly coded the software so as to obtain reliable results. Conversely, the source code of the software is typically made available in an open source tool, increasing one’s ability to test and assure the reliability of the software, and the accuracy of the results obtained.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology provides a working group testing disk imagining tools that may be used in computer forensics, ensuring that the requirements are met. This is however merely one type of tool which is being tested, and whilst it is a step in the right direction, bodies such as the national institute of standards and technology do not assume liability for any results, nor do they certify