Login Join Us
Dusko Knezevic v The Government of the Republic of Montenegro [2024] EWHC 761 (Admin) Dusko Knezevic v The Government of the Republic of Montenegro [2024] EWHC 761 (Admin)

Dusko Knezevic v The Government of the Republic of Montenegro [2024] EWHC 761 (Admin)

The qualifications and experience of an expert in an extradition appeal did not demonstrate that he was an expert on the issues before the...
Dr Vanessa Hill v Touchlight Genetics Limited [2024] EWHC 533 (Pat) Dr Vanessa Hill v Touchlight Genetics Limited [2024] EWHC 533 (Pat)

Dr Vanessa Hill v Touchlight Genetics Limited [2024] EWHC 533 (Pat)

In considering whether to appoint a scientific advisor or order the exchange of expert evidence, the judge in a patent case considered the...
A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and... A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

EWI Honorary Fellow Tony Saggers has been a drug trafficking Expert Witness since 1995, alongside a career in law enforcement that spanned 30 years....
Aston Risk Management Ltd v Lee Jones & Ors [2024] EWHC 252 (Ch) Aston Risk Management Ltd v Lee Jones & Ors [2024] EWHC 252 (Ch)

Aston Risk Management Ltd v Lee Jones & Ors [2024] EWHC 252 (Ch)

The judge found that providing preliminary advice on the issues that arise regarding quantum did not impinge on the expert's ability to...
Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

The Forensic Science Regulator is consulting on the draft for the development of version 2 of the forensic science code of practice.

News

Are Digital Forensics Experts prone to bias?
Simon Berney-Edwards
/ Categories: Industry News

Are Digital Forensics Experts prone to bias?

The Guardian recently reported that a new study has found participants found more or less evidence on hard drive depending on what contextual information they had.

 

The study undertaken by the University of Oslo, Norway, gave digital forensics examiners from eight countries including the UK the same computer hard drive to analyse. Some of the examiners were provided with only basic contextual information about the case, while others were told the suspect had confessed to the crime, had a strong motive for committing it or that the police believed she had been framed.

 

The study, which will be published in Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation, found that the examiners who had been led to believe the suspect might be innocent documented the fewest traces of evidence in the files, while those who knew of a potential motive identified the most traces.

 

Read the article on the Guardian Website.

Previous Article What the court expects of a competent expert witness
Next Article Recent judgment highlights Expert Witness failings
Print
1729
Comments are only visible to subscribers.