Investigative Parameters in Forensic Science

Question 1

A forensic readiness plan has several benefits to any company that implements it. First, the plan proves that the company is a law-abiding corporate citizen. Many customers and investors prefer dealing with companies that are approved and recognized by the government. Having the forensic readiness plan in place shows that the company complies with the laws (Kiarie & Karume, 2017). The customers and investors will have confidence in the company since their interests will be best-taken care of. Second, the plan helps in reducing investigation expenses. There are many costs incurred in collecting evidence to be used in cases. The plan ensures that evidence is obtained before the incident, and thus, the investigators will only need to analyze and review the already existing plan. Third, the plan promotes a sense of responsibility among employees. The workers are aware that every single step or action they take is carefully being monitored as a result of a forensic readiness plan. They will refrain from engaging in destructive actions.

Fourth, the plan facilitates the maintenance of digital evidence. Some employees within the organizations are notorious and are involved in malicious activities. The plan will keep track of such employees, and electronic evidence will be gathered to be used against them if they misbehave. There are two vital requirements for private businesses to establish a forensic readiness plan. They are; identify incidences that demand digital evidence and draft a reliable policy that guarantee maximum security for the digital proof.

Question 2

Mr. Belcamp’s locker within the company will be scoured. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S constitution allows searches for personal property as long as the search has substantial reasons. The quest to be carried on Belcamp's locker has significant reasons. He has threatened to reveal the intellectual property of the company to its rivals, and this has threatened the competitive advantage of the company. The company has been prompted to maintain its privacy by guarding product X. A master key will be used to open Belcamp's desk in his presence, if possible. As an employee, Belcamp knew his duties and responsibilities, and he had failed to accomplish them as required. The search will be allowed since it has substantial reasons for why it must be conducted. Conducting the search in his presence will prove that the company has no evil motives about him. The primary aim of doing the research is to protect product X, which was deemed to perform well in the market.

Question 3

The security staff at the checkpoint will be directed to open Mr. Belcamp's briefcase and get hold of any potential digital evidence that they can find. The Fourth Amendment of the constitution prevents individuals from unreasonable searches and seizure from the government, not private persons (Findlaw, 2019). The company is a private entity on its own and is allowed to carry out personal searches to its employees for valid reasons. Belcamp’s expectation of privacy is objectively unreasonable. He has verbally threatened to reveal the company’s secrets to a competitor. This utterance raises speculations within the company on how he will carry this essential information out of the company’s premises. Even if he had to argue at the checkpoint that his privacy rights were being violated, the whole society would agree that the company was right. Belcamp understands that routine check-up by security staff is a must from his previous experiences. The security guards, unlike policemen, are allowed to carry out personal searches and seizure on behalf of their employer.

Question 4

The incident of Mr. Belcamp not signing the receipt page of the handbook matters a lot. The signature would have shown to what extent was the company going to conduct search and seizure on Belcamp. A handbook is essential as it includes the company's policies, rules, and working procedures. The manual also outlines the culture of the company and benefits entitled to employees if they abide by the rules. The handbook ensures that employees become more productive in the company, and there are reduced cases of conflicts between them and the employer (O’Donnell, 2019). However, the handbook becomes irrelevant without the signature of the worker. The signature will acknowledge the fact the employee has read and understood it, and he or she is willing to follow what is contained in the handbook. The lack of Belcamp's signature on the employee handbook tells a lot. First, the company was reluctant to follow the progress of its workers. Mr. Harold and Ms. Bass had failed in their responsibilities. They would have followed up Belcamp to ensure that he signed the receipt page of the handbook. Appending the signature would mean that Belcamp was going to be held liable for his actions.

However, the absence of the signature would also affect Belcamp. In case he tried to sue the company for compensation, he would not receive it. The company will stand firm and respond that he was not entitled to any benefits since he had not signed the manual. If there was a policy that qualified employees to privacy, Belcamp will be exempted. He was thus, entitled to search and seizure without any limitations as he was not immune against them.

Question 5

Involving the police will result in a loss of authority over the investigation. The company had done a lot in solving this case, and it wishes to carry on until the investigation is completed. When the police are involved, they will dictate what should be done concerning the investigation. They will establish their investigative procedures and rules to be followed. There might be a distortion of the evidence that has taken the company plenty of time to assemble. The police will not be convinced easily that the evidence was acquired legally. They will question the company on the methods it used to gather the evidence. The evidence might be disregarded since the law does not recognize some means of collecting it. The proof will be rejected as it will be believed to be 'fruits of the poisonous tree.'

The progress of the investigation process will be slowed down. The police are known for taking more time in solving cases due to lengthy procedures and many considerations to follow. They will have to analyze every single element of the case. The police will extend the search making the investigation more complicated. The presence of police officers at the company's premises will disrupt the regular routine as this will create anxiety among employees. This may lead to unwanted publicity that will benefit the company's competitors. It is evident that involving the police will change the direction of the investigation. The company will have to trust its employees who have experience in solving such cases

Question 6

Chain of custody refers to the detailed form that records and preserves evidence in investigating a case. It acknowledges the various people who composed, analyzed and organized the evidence during the investigation (Prayudi & SN, 2015). The chain of custody plays a vital role in preserving crucial evidence to be used in determining the case. It ensures that the evidence is out of reach to unauthorized personnel who may distort it. The chain of custody will enable the company to affirm that it was right in dismissing Belcamp. This will give the company an upper hand in case Belcamp opted to sue it. If the chain of custody is not documented, the essential evidence gathered will be deemed useless. The efforts of people and expenses of the company in collecting evidence will be wasted. The company will have to ensure that it establishes and upholds the chain of custody.

References

Findlaw. (2019). Police search and seizure limitations. Retrieved from https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/searches-and-seizures-the-limitations-of-the-police.html . 

Karie, N., M., & Karume, S. M. (2017) Digital forensic readiness in organizations: Issues and challenges, Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 12 (4), 43-51. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2017.1436.

O’Donnell, R. ( 2019, February 26). The case for an employee handbook acknowledgment form. Zenefits. Retrieved from https://www.zenefits.com/workest/employee-handbook-acknowledgment-form/ . 

Prayudi, Y., & SN, A. (2015). Digital chain of custody: State of the art. international Journal of Computer Applications, 114 (5), 1-8.