The next installment of NACDL's Engage & Exchange Video Discussion Series–Digital Forensics in Child Exploitation Cases, covering child pornography cases and how experts can help you win your case. The webinar featured Forensic Computer Experts Larry Daniel, Lars Daniel, and Jake Green from Envista Forensics.

With an increasing number of police departments across the country turning to unregulated, untested, and flawed facial recognition technology to identify suspects, it is vital defenders understand the technology, its limitations, and how to challenge its use in their cases.

This page contains materials and information related to digital forensics.

(Pre-Search Instructions and Post-Search Reasonableness)

A Report by NACDL’s Fourth Amendment Advocacy Committee Reporter, Steven R. Morrison [Released July 2014]

The Fourth Amendment has entered the digital age. New surveillance technologies and programs — from GPS tracking devices to automated license plate readers to bulk data collection — have upended traditional law enforcement practices and created new challenges for defense lawyers. This report offers an overview of this symposium and the substantive areas of concern related to new technological and legal changes that impact Fourth Amendment protections in criminal cases. [Released June 2016]

Federal laws protecting individual privacy rights in electronic communications have not been meaningfully updated in over 25 years, even though many of today’s technologies were not even conceived of when Congress considered the legislation and when the Supreme Court created the “Third Party Doctrine.” This white paper discusses the current status of the law and concludes with recommendations for reform. [Released February 2012]

Presented by: Clare Garvie, Sr. Associate, Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology; Kaitlin Jackson, Attorney, Bronx Defenders; and Joshua Kroll, PhD, computer scientist, Postdoctoral Research Scholar, School of Information, University of California at Berkeley

This webinar was supported by Grant No. 2013-MU-BX-K014 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Presented by Matt Mitchell, hacker, civil rights advocate, and Director of Digital Safety & Privacy, at Tactical Tech (also known as the Tactical Technology Collective)

Presented by Alice Fontier, Managing Director, Criminal Defense Practice, Bronx Defenders

Trial Advocacy: Forensic Sciences Training
Philadelphia, PA | 2018 | Grant-Funded Public Defense Training

HOW IS A CELL PHONE’S LOCATION IDENTIFIED? A cell phone’s location can be detected through cell site location information (CSLI) or global positioning system (GPS) data. CSLI refers to the information collected as a cell phone identifies its location to nearby cell towers. CSLI from nearby cell towers can indicate a cell phone’s approximate location. With information from multiple cell towers, a technique called “triangulation” is used to locate a cell phone with greater precision. Cell phone location information can be “historical” or “prospective.”

Cell Site Simulator Primer.

ALPR Primer.

The U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals broke new ground in 2012 when it held the Fifth Amendment barred the government from compelling decryption of digital media purportedly containing encrypted, self-incriminating data. While the decision could sweep aside some of the best evidence prosecutors are accustomed to obtaining, the ground that decision breaks may prove to be less fertile than it first appears, especially because the Supreme Court has limited the Fifth Amendment rights available to many in white collar cases.

In order to be prepared, defense lawyers must seek evidence from sources beyond Snapchat and Twitter. Ian Friedman and Eric Nemecek consider the increased reliance on information derived from portable electronic devices, including Fitbit and Garmin fitness trackers. In addition, they discuss the difference between “precision” and “accuracy” as those terms relate to geo-location information provided by applications such as Foursquare and Google Maps. They point out that, as with any source, collecting information presents concerns regarding how to verify its accuracy.

Smartphones can create a detailed record of what their users have been doing. Wisconsin litigator Peyton Engel focuses on the traits smartphones have in common with general-purpose computers and the implications from a digital evidentiary perspective. He discusses retrieving evidence from smartphones, extracting information from cloud storage, finding evidence of a secret or hidden phone, wearable tech, issuing subpoenas for social media records, and using apps to collect evidence.