Spoliation Case Study

Spoliation as it applies to Digital Forensics

In 1985 when I got my first PC computer I remember everyone was talking about going paperless. Over the years of using computers I have experienced the shift from using less paper by hand writing or typing letters to using programs such as Microsoft Word or Libre Office writer to create my written communications. Instead of mailing a letter that was hand written or typed, I now email my documents directly to the recipient. The time that my written communication takes to get to the recipient has been shortened using electronic communication methods. I assign my students homework online and they submit their assignments to me online reducing the use of paper and reducing the time to communicate.

The initial investigation on the laptop is what led to the investigation of Richard’s work computer. Evidence not only showed that of spoliation on both the couple’s laptop and Richard’s work computer but also multiple similar instances of witness tampering as well as perjury. The judge stated that if proof of spoliation of evidence on Richard’s part was evident then his judgement would not be in favor of Richard the defendant. After the spoliation case was closed the child custody case would begin.

Protegga states that anti-forensic tools, such as Evidence Eliminator, are used to interfere with the digital forensic tools used to recover data. The investigative process of examination or analysis is the important piece of electronic discovery as the recovery of the electronic data is a portion of that process. The anti-forensic tools concentrate on outsmarting the tools used by the digital forensic investigators but do not concentrate on outsmarting the digital forensic investigators

In the United States, Federal law and most State laws, make the act of spoliation of evidence a criminal one. Since the act of spoliation is a criminal act, the suspect for this crime may be incarcerated or incur fines associated with the crime. As established by case law, any legal proceedings that may have been altered due to spoliation of electronic evidence by a suspect may be left to interpretation by a judge. In a case that involves spoliation, a judge could make a decision in favor of the victims in a case based on reviewing the actions taken by the suspect to destroy the electronic evidence as well as reviewing the evidence that was recovered. In theory the act of spoliation of evidence could signify that the suspect had a guilty conscience or some kind of motivation to obstruct the collection of evidence for the