Should digital evidence provided by the government be valid in criminal trials?

Should digital evidence provided by the government be valid in criminal trials?

Yes
No
Don't know


If the government can do this then why should any digital evidence provided by the government be trusted in any trial?




What Exactly Are the Spy Agencies Actually DOING with their Bag of Dirty Tricks? Washington's Blog
[h=3]TOOLS AND POTENTIAL MISUSES[/h] Here are the actual dirty tricks in the British spy agencies toolkit, with hypothetical examples of potential misuses …
CHANGELING: Ability to spoof any email address and send email under that identity. Fake an email from a privacy advocate to make it look like he’s proposing terrorism.

SCRAPHEAP CHALLENGE: Perfect spoofing of emails from Blackberry targets. Fake an email from an opponent of bailouts to the giant banks to make it look like she’s planning to bomb a bank.

BURLESQUE: The capacity to send spoofed SMS messages. Fake a message from an an anti-war writer to make it look like he’s planning to sabotage a military base.

IMPERIAL BARGE : For connecting two target phone together in a call. Fake a telephone connection to make it look like a critic of the president’s policies spoke with a leader of Al Qaeda.

BADGER : Mass delivery of email messaging to support an Information Operations campaign. Send out a fake, mass email pretending to be from a prominent whistleblower “admitting” that he’s mentally unstable, disgruntled, dishonest, vindictive and a Russian spy.

WARPATH: Mass delivery of SMS messages to support an Information Operations campaign. Send out a fake, mass message from a targeted group calling for the murder of all Christians and Jews.

SPACE ROCKET: A programme covering insertion of media into target networks. Insert a video of underage girls on a whistleblower website.

CLEAN SWEEP Masquerade Facebook Wall Posts for individuals or entire countries. Put up a bunch of fake wall posts calling for jihad on the Facebook page of a reporter giving first-hand reports of what’s really happening in a country that the U.S. has targeted for regime change.

HAVOK Real-time website cloning technique allowing on-the-fly alterations. Hack the website of a state politician who insists the government must respect the Constitution, and post fake demands for a violent march on Washington, D.C.

SILVERLORD: Disruption of video-based websites hosting extremist content through concerted target discovery and content removal. Disrupt websites hosting videos espousing libertarian views.

SUNBLOCK: Ability to deny functionality to send/receive email or view material online. Block emails to reporters and the web functionality of a government insider who is about to go public on wrongdoing.

ANGRY PIRATE: A tool that will permanently disable a target’s account on their computer. Disable the accounts of a leading opponent of genetically modified foods.

PREDATORS FACE: Targeted Denial Of Service against Web Servers. Take down a website which is disclosing hard-hitting information on illegal government actions.

UNDERPASS: Change outcome of online polls. Change the results of an online poll from one showing that the American people overwhelmingly oppose a new war which is unnecessary for the defense of America’s national security to showing support for it.

GATEWAY: Ability to artificially increase traffic to a website. Make a website calling for more surveillance against the American people appear hugely popular.

BOMB BAY: The capacity to increase website hits, rankings. Make it look like a site praising praising Al Qaeda is popular among a targeted local population, when the locals actually despise violent Islamic fundamentalists.

SLIPSTREAM: Ability to inflate page views on websites. Make it appear that an article saying that the Constitution is “outdated” and “unrealistic in the post-9/11 world” is widely popular.

GESTATOR: Amplification of a given message, normally video, on popular multimedia websites (Youtube). Make a propaganda video – saying that Dear Leader will always help and protect us – go viral.

Does the defense have the same ability to present digital evidence?

radcen said:

Does the defense have the same ability to present digital evidence?

Click to expand...

I don't think the average person can spoof a email,msn messages and so on.

I want to say yes, but what I mean by "yes" is that it should be allowed but taken with a grain of salt (unfortunately courts strike me as way too technical to allow such a thing) especially if "legitimate" evidence begins to contradict cyber-evidence.

I would think that any competent defense lawyer or group would include technical experts to throw doubt on evidence such as this, which can be (apparently) faked.

IF that is the case, I do not see the issue - indeed, if they could prove evidence was falsified, it would cast doubt not only on that evidence, but on the whole case.

The Mark said:

I would think that any competent defense lawyer or group would include technical experts to throw doubt on evidence such as this, which can be (apparently) faked.

IF that is the case, I do not see the issue - indeed, if they could prove evidence was falsified, it would cast doubt not only on that evidence, but on the whole case.

Click to expand...

I actually like that, allow cyber-evidence and proving that cyber-evidence is false can have an extreme backfire on the side that presented it and also cast doubt on what could be the perceived but not actual truth.

The Mark said:

I would think that any competent defense lawyer or group would include technical experts to throw doubt on evidence such as this, which can be (apparently) faked.

IF that is the case, I do not see the issue - indeed, if they could prove evidence was falsified, it would cast doubt not only on that evidence, but on the whole case.

Click to expand...

How do you prove a email was falsified?

jamesrage said:

How do you prove a email was falsified?

Click to expand...

It would be enough to prove it COULD be falsified, I think.

I'm no expert, so I have no idea.