*/
The government is struggling to reverse the damage to the criminal justice system resulting from the politics of austerity with an economy damaged by the cost of COVID-19 and Brexit. Its willingness to tap expertise outside the Labour Party’s traditional leadership, especially for the prison crisis with the appointment of Lord Timpson as a minister and former Conservative Justice Secretary, David Gauke, is an encouraging sign of fresh thinking in Petty France. What is not so clear is the extent to which the government might also be willing to identify ways of dealing with the criminal justice system’s myriad problems by another route than the traditional top-down approach to identifying options for policy change.
Anticipating the 2024 change of government, academics from Northumbria University and the University of Derby conducted research to help inform UK policymakers on the use of digital forensics and digital evidence across the criminal justice system. This research, Digital Forensics within the Criminal Justice System: Use, Effectiveness, and Impact, was presented to senior officials at the Home Office-led Forensic Science Reform Programme Board in 2024 and may have had some impact on some of the post-election briefing prepared for incoming ministers.
With the assistance of the Home Office, our team captured the everyday experiences of digital forensics within the criminal justice system, from the initial point of criminal investigation to trial and appeal. Participants in the study included representatives from regional police forces, the National Crime Agency and those involved in counter-terrorism, Digital Forensics Unit police investigators, HM Prison and Probation Service, independent digital forensics practitioners, the Crown Prosecution Service, and solicitors and barristers with experience of both prosecuting and defending.
The design of the project was initially presented to Exchange Chambers’ Serious Crime and Fraud Forum in spring 2023. Later that year, the research team undertook a series of interviews, focus groups and surveys with participants. The project brought together stakeholders who would not ordinarily interact, or who would only interact within the court, to facilitate frank discussion of their experiences of digital forensics. These candid and open inter-stakeholder conversations produced rich research findings, leading to the report’s recommendations.
The central findings are categorised into three themes (with a fourth speaking directly to the Home Office’s Impact of Forensic Science Project, the purpose of which was to develop a model to allow the impact of forensic science across the criminal justice system to be measured).
All participants in the research reflected how, across the criminal justice system, there is a general and fundamental lack of knowledge and understanding by those not intimately involved in digital forensic practice. The Report suggests this lack of digital forensics literacy ultimately contributes to:
A range of technical and practical challenges were identified by participants which included:
A major challenge identified was around digital evidence and its admissibility, with many participants reporting limited attention paid to whether digital forensic evidence would ultimately be admissible. A crucial finding was that little, if no, attention is paid to whether different forms of digital forensic evidence are fact or opinion, or the underpinning reliability of the evidence and its limitations. Unsurprisingly, the rules of disclosure and challenges/failings of the disclosure regime regarding digital forensics was also raised by participants – both lawyers and investigators.
The recommendations of the Report are mapped to the central identified three categories of challenges.
The research team will be presenting at several conferences over the following months, and welcome feedback and opinion on the report.
The Northumbria University Digital Forensics Project research team comprised Dr Cerian Griffiths, Associate Professor at Northumbria University and academic member of Exchange Chambers, along with Northumbria University’s Emma Piasecki, Philip Anderson and Professor Tim J Wilson, and University of Derby’s Dr Sophie Carr. The team would also like to thank John Jones KC from Exchange Chambers for his invaluable input and support. The full report can be viewed here.
Dr Cerian Griffiths is Associate Professor at Northumbria University and an academic member of Exchange Chambers. Called to the Bar in 2007, before pursuing her academic career Cerian worked for a number of prosecution agencies including the Serious Fraud Agency, the Financial Services Authority and the Office of Fair Trading.
The government is struggling to reverse the damage to the criminal justice system resulting from the politics of austerity with an economy damaged by the cost of COVID-19 and Brexit. Its willingness to tap expertise outside the Labour Party’s traditional leadership, especially for the prison crisis with the appointment of Lord Timpson as a minister and former Conservative Justice Secretary, David Gauke, is an encouraging sign of fresh thinking in Petty France. What is not so clear is the extent to which the government might also be willing to identify ways of dealing with the criminal justice system’s myriad problems by another route than the traditional top-down approach to identifying options for policy change.
Anticipating the 2024 change of government, academics from Northumbria University and the University of Derby conducted research to help inform UK policymakers on the use of digital forensics and digital evidence across the criminal justice system. This research, Digital Forensics within the Criminal Justice System: Use, Effectiveness, and Impact, was presented to senior officials at the Home Office-led Forensic Science Reform Programme Board in 2024 and may have had some impact on some of the post-election briefing prepared for incoming ministers.
With the assistance of the Home Office, our team captured the everyday experiences of digital forensics within the criminal justice system, from the initial point of criminal investigation to trial and appeal. Participants in the study included representatives from regional police forces, the National Crime Agency and those involved in counter-terrorism, Digital Forensics Unit police investigators, HM Prison and Probation Service, independent digital forensics practitioners, the Crown Prosecution Service, and solicitors and barristers with experience of both prosecuting and defending.
The design of the project was initially presented to Exchange Chambers’ Serious Crime and Fraud Forum in spring 2023. Later that year, the research team undertook a series of interviews, focus groups and surveys with participants. The project brought together stakeholders who would not ordinarily interact, or who would only interact within the court, to facilitate frank discussion of their experiences of digital forensics. These candid and open inter-stakeholder conversations produced rich research findings, leading to the report’s recommendations.
The central findings are categorised into three themes (with a fourth speaking directly to the Home Office’s Impact of Forensic Science Project, the purpose of which was to develop a model to allow the impact of forensic science across the criminal justice system to be measured).
All participants in the research reflected how, across the criminal justice system, there is a general and fundamental lack of knowledge and understanding by those not intimately involved in digital forensic practice. The Report suggests this lack of digital forensics literacy ultimately contributes to:
A range of technical and practical challenges were identified by participants which included:
A major challenge identified was around digital evidence and its admissibility, with many participants reporting limited attention paid to whether digital forensic evidence would ultimately be admissible. A crucial finding was that little, if no, attention is paid to whether different forms of digital forensic evidence are fact or opinion, or the underpinning reliability of the evidence and its limitations. Unsurprisingly, the rules of disclosure and challenges/failings of the disclosure regime regarding digital forensics was also raised by participants – both lawyers and investigators.
The recommendations of the Report are mapped to the central identified three categories of challenges.
The research team will be presenting at several conferences over the following months, and welcome feedback and opinion on the report.
The Northumbria University Digital Forensics Project research team comprised Dr Cerian Griffiths, Associate Professor at Northumbria University and academic member of Exchange Chambers, along with Northumbria University’s Emma Piasecki, Philip Anderson and Professor Tim J Wilson, and University of Derby’s Dr Sophie Carr. The team would also like to thank John Jones KC from Exchange Chambers for his invaluable input and support. The full report can be viewed here.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
Kindness Ambassadors – coming to a courtroom near you! Valerie Charbit, Nicola Shannon KC and Professor Robin Banerjee update readers on the second phase of the project examining, and promoting, the impact of kindness and how it can fit into an adversarial system
