Posted: April 4th, 2022

Avoiding Mistakes

Locate a current case study from an authoritative source which discusses errors made in the course of a computer forensic investigation.

Briefly summarize the case; apply the course materials and at least 3 sources from your independent research to discuss it in depth. Depending on the case, your discussion may include but is not limited to:

-Analysis and evaluation of the principles applied in the case, including the code of ethics
-Evaluation of resolution(s)
-Ace my homework – Write my paper – Online assignment help tutors – Discussion of why errors happened and how they could have been prevented
-Comparisons to other examples or cases

Your discussion should take into account the context of the case study, including the regulations and restrictions relevant to the domain(s) involved (e.g., health care, military intelligence, finance, law enforcement, etc.). Cite all references to your sources (including the original study).
—

Avoiding Mistakes
Name
Institution

Avoiding Mistakes
In the State vs. Casey Anthony, computer forensic was one of the significant components associated with providing evidence in the trial of Casey Anthony for the murder of her daughter Caylee Anthony. The case was full of misleading law enforcement and processes, including the mistake associated with an error in computer forensic investigation (FindLaw, 2013). In the case, the computer forensic experts were to identify any evidence on the internet that linked Casey to the murder of her daughter. However, the police forensic expert tends to have missed enough to establish Casey’s internet presence. The police forensic went ahead to prepare John Brandley, a programmer of CacheBank, to testify that Casey visited the website 84 times. However, the ethical aspect of the case is that the defense forensic experts had examined the Casey website presence and identified that at what time during the period of her daughter missing she had searched “how to make a murder look like an accident” or something along those lines, and in the same session, Casey logged into her social media accounts, which places her behind the keyboard during the noteworthy searches. The police computer forensic examiner had missed such evidence and was not able to establish how many times had the defendant visited the website. The defense had no duty of disclosing the data they had established during their investigation, which raised the ethical question regarding computer forensic investigations. Each party might. In the line of investigation, withdraw or add evidence that might have a huge impact on the case.
According to the case study, the State, through the testimony of Bradley, who testified that Casey had visited the website 84 times searching for information about chloroform, were determined to be false. The page, which supposedly had been visited 84 times, did not contain much on chloroform and visiting the page would mean nothing. According to the defense, the defendant instead had visited MySpace, with the history indicating that the defendant, at no point, had searched any information regarding chloroform. The other incident that indicated an error in the computer forensic investigation was the nefarious searches presented by the State. According to the State, Casey had searched self-defense and household weapons, where she read the book on self-defense for women (The State vs. Casey Anthony, 2011). The prosecution specified that she concentrated on page 79 of the book based on the records of the internet, which indicated which types of household items can make weapons for self-defense. The prosecution also provided evidence that the defendant had also searched for a shovel. However, the defense visited the pages and was able to defuse them, citing the errors made by the State in the computer forensic investigation. It was clear from the computer forensic evidence that the computer records presented at the trail were inaccurate and incomplete. The main reason for the inaccuracy and incomplete evidence was due to the fact that the validation tool was not well utilized by the investigators.
For errors that occurred in the case could have been prevented by utilizing the validation tool of computer forensic investigation. The processing of data was not correctly conducted, which also affected the ability to analyze the data (Forensics, 2018: 2024 – Write My Essay For Me | Essay Writing Service For Your Papers Online). The analyst should ensure the volatile data is captured using the right tools, including process explorer and rootkit revealer, to ensure the records provided are accurate and consistent.

References
FindLaw. (2013). Casey Marie ANTHONY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1621490.html#
Forensics. (2018: 2024 – Write My Essay For Me | Essay Writing Service For Your Papers Online). Computer Forensics Investigation – A Case Study. Retrieved from https://resources.infosecinstitute.com/computer-forensics-investigation-case-study/#gref
“The State vs. Casey Anthony.” (2011). Casey Anthony: The Computer Forensics. https://statevcasey.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/the-computer-forensics/

Write My Paper