Opinion evidence in Cell Site Analysis

Matthew Stephen Tart

doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2020.02.002

Opinion evidence in Cell Site Analysis

Matthew Stephen Tart

Research Centre for Computational Science and Mathematical Modelling

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

192 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Issues concerning forensic inference exist in all areas of Forensic Science, and Cell Site Analysis is no exception. There is a standard concerning opinion evidence adopted by both the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) and the Association of Forensic Science Providers (AFSP) based on the principles of the Case Assessment and Interpretation (CAI) Model widely used within “traditional” forensic Science. This standard has not been widely adopted, or does not appear to be particularly well known, either within Cell Site Analysis or in the general field of Digital Forensics. This paper is aimed at Cell Site Analysis experts and outlines the legislative and regulatory framework within which opinion in Cell Site Analysis is provided and addresses how the principles defined in the AFSP standard can be applied to Cell Site Analysis. A case example highlighting differences between a task-driven approach commonly used within Cell Site Analysis and a CAI approach to the same data is presented and explored.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	363-374
Number of pages	12
Journal	Science & Justice
Volume	60
Issue number	4
Early online date	26 Feb 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2020.02.002
Publication status	Published - Jul 2020

Bibliographical note

Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

This document is the author’s post-print version, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer-review process. Some differences between the published version and this version may remain and you are advised to consult the published version if you wish to cite from it.

Access to Document

10.1016/j.scijus.2020.02.002

Post-PrintAccepted author manuscript, 1.92 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{407b9f4972584fb9a0d1705e2b3c78b4,

title = "Opinion evidence in Cell Site Analysis",

abstract = "Issues concerning forensic inference exist in all areas of Forensic Science, and Cell Site Analysis is no exception. There is a standard concerning opinion evidence adopted by both the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) and the Association of Forensic Science Providers (AFSP) based on the principles of the Case Assessment and Interpretation (CAI) Model widely used within “traditional” forensic Science. This standard has not been widely adopted, or does not appear to be particularly well known, either within Cell Site Analysis or in the general field of Digital Forensics. This paper is aimed at Cell Site Analysis experts and outlines the legislative and regulatory framework within which opinion in Cell Site Analysis is provided and addresses how the principles defined in the AFSP standard can be applied to Cell Site Analysis. A case example highlighting differences between a task-driven approach commonly used within Cell Site Analysis and a CAI approach to the same data is presented and explored.",

author = "Tart, {Matthew Stephen}",

note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. This document is the author{\textquoteright}s post-print version, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer-review process. Some differences between the published version and this version may remain and you are advised to consult the published version if you wish to cite from it. ",

year = "2020",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1016/j.scijus.2020.02.002",

language = "English",

volume = "60",

pages = "363--374",

journal = "Science & Justice",

issn = "1355-0306",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Opinion evidence in Cell Site Analysis

AU - Tart, Matthew Stephen

N1 - Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. This document is the author’s post-print version, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer-review process. Some differences between the published version and this version may remain and you are advised to consult the published version if you wish to cite from it.

PY - 2020/7

Y1 - 2020/7

N2 - Issues concerning forensic inference exist in all areas of Forensic Science, and Cell Site Analysis is no exception. There is a standard concerning opinion evidence adopted by both the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) and the Association of Forensic Science Providers (AFSP) based on the principles of the Case Assessment and Interpretation (CAI) Model widely used within “traditional” forensic Science. This standard has not been widely adopted, or does not appear to be particularly well known, either within Cell Site Analysis or in the general field of Digital Forensics. This paper is aimed at Cell Site Analysis experts and outlines the legislative and regulatory framework within which opinion in Cell Site Analysis is provided and addresses how the principles defined in the AFSP standard can be applied to Cell Site Analysis. A case example highlighting differences between a task-driven approach commonly used within Cell Site Analysis and a CAI approach to the same data is presented and explored.

AB - Issues concerning forensic inference exist in all areas of Forensic Science, and Cell Site Analysis is no exception. There is a standard concerning opinion evidence adopted by both the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) and the Association of Forensic Science Providers (AFSP) based on the principles of the Case Assessment and Interpretation (CAI) Model widely used within “traditional” forensic Science. This standard has not been widely adopted, or does not appear to be particularly well known, either within Cell Site Analysis or in the general field of Digital Forensics. This paper is aimed at Cell Site Analysis experts and outlines the legislative and regulatory framework within which opinion in Cell Site Analysis is provided and addresses how the principles defined in the AFSP standard can be applied to Cell Site Analysis. A case example highlighting differences between a task-driven approach commonly used within Cell Site Analysis and a CAI approach to the same data is presented and explored.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-85081935621&partnerID=MN8TOARS

U2 - 10.1016/j.scijus.2020.02.002

DO - 10.1016/j.scijus.2020.02.002

M3 - Article

SN - 1355-0306

VL - 60

SP - 363

EP - 374

JO - Science & Justice

JF - Science & Justice

IS - 4

ER -

Opinion evidence in Cell Site Analysis

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this