In general when law enforcement presents forensic testimony in court, they try to do it by having practiced law enforcement talk to the analysis report. By normal rules one would think this would qualify as hearsay but it's seldom challenged by defense attorneys. The technical person who actually performed the analysis is rarely made available.
Why aren't the actual analysts in court?
Most technical people are not trained to handle a court room environment. Worse, most tech people have a tendency to be accurate and comprehensive, delving into techniques, error ranges, and reliability. This is undesirable from a prosecution viewpoint.
Why don't defense attorneys challenge?
The vast majority of defense attorneys don't have the monetary resources to obtain their own expert support nor the expertise to directly challenge. Lastly, the vast majority of forensic experts obtained their expertise via working for law enforcement and are disinclined to work for the defense due to personal proclivity or the very real possibility of being professionally blackballed.
It's very simple.
First, they have no technical understanding of what or how links work.
Second, only those that donate sufficiently large amounts of money can speak and explain their positions.
It boils down to ignorant and paid for.
We have the best legal system money can buy!
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Ed Snow.
Forensic Expert Testimony
In general when law enforcement presents forensic testimony in court, they try to do it by having practiced law enforcement talk to the analysis report. By normal rules one would think this would qualify as hearsay but it's seldom challenged by defense attorneys. The technical person who actually performed the analysis is rarely made available. Why aren't the actual analysts in court? Most technical people are not trained to handle a court room environment. Worse, most tech people have a tendency to be accurate and comprehensive, delving into techniques, error ranges, and reliability. This is undesirable from a prosecution viewpoint. Why don't defense attorneys challenge? The vast majority of defense attorneys don't have the monetary resources to obtain their own expert support nor the expertise to directly challenge. Lastly, the vast majority of forensic experts obtained their expertise via working for law enforcement and are disinclined to work for the defense due to personal proclivity or the very real possibility of being professionally blackballed.
Re: Evidence
It's very simple. First, they have no technical understanding of what or how links work. Second, only those that donate sufficiently large amounts of money can speak and explain their positions. It boils down to ignorant and paid for. We have the best legal system money can buy!