buy custom Digital Forensics in the Criminal Justice System essay

buy custom Digital Forensics in the Criminal Justice System essay The main aim of conducting a search is to obtain evidence in case that there is criminal suspicion. It requires that one party feels convinced that this process would lead to gaining access to materials or content that is related to a specific crime. The law stipulates that a search should be conducted upon obtaining a search warrant from a magistrate in a court. The search is carried out by law enforcement officers in the presence of a search warrant. However, there are a few exceptions whereby a search is deemed legal even without the presentation of a warrant. The fourth amendment protects members of the society from unreasonable searches. Under the rule, a warrant should specify the place to be searched and the items that should be seized during the process (Kerr, 2015). 1. In the mentioned scenario involving Makestuff Company, Mr. Andfirums concern is that the source code for product X may land in the hands of the firms competitors, leading to a massive loss of revenue due to the theft of the companys intellectual property. The suspicions emerged due to Mr. Yourprops arrogance during the exit interview. However, conducting a search on his personal vehicle that is parked within the companys premises is beyond my mandate as the companys information security officer. The supervisor cannot do it, too, because the law stipulates that a search can only be executed by law enforcement officers. The only thing we can do is to contact law enforcement officers to carry out the process. 2. In case there is evidence of theft of the intellectual property, the firm can pursue criminal prosecution. The source code for product X is the intellectual property belonging to Makestuff Company as it was intended for use in the development of a new product. The supervisor can therefore request local police investigators to conduct a search on Mr. Yourprops personal vehicle parkd within the companys premises. The reason is that there is a high probability of finding evidence in his car thus the search would be reasonable. However, it is important for the police investigators to obtain a search warrant from a magistrates court. The warrant should specify that the car is one of the places where the search should be conducted. It must also determine the item that should be seized (Kerr, 2012). In this case, the item is the source code for product X. However, if there is not enough time to obtain the search warrant, the police may still conduct the search if there is sufficient reas on to show that the evidence may be found there. The provision is one of the exemptions to the fourth amendment. 3. In an organizational setting, the law protects the privacy of all employees against unwarranted searches at their workstations. Employers must obtain a search warrant from the relevant authorities unless there is a mutual consent between the employer and the worker regarding the search. When conducting a process, the warrant specifies its scope in terms of the persons, place and items that should be searched. The places to be searched must have a high probability of containing evidence. In this regard, it would be unreasonable for the supervisor to search Mr. Yourprops locker at the onsite gym unless there is sufficient information that he keeps his work-related items in it. 4. A search warrant should be executed in the presence of all the parties involved. For instance, if the process is to be conducted in a house, its owner must be present at the time of the search in his house or property. Similarly, it would be inappropriate to search Mr. Yourprops office desk by using a master key after he has left. The action would be similar to breaking into someones house or property and conducting a search in his/her absence. The best course of action would be to serve Mr. Yourprop with the search wwarrant. Force can only be applied if he is provided with the warrant but refuses to comply. 5. According to the companys policy, all items brought onto the firms property, inclusive those of the employees, are a subject to random searches for the companys items. The fact that Mr. Yourprop did not sign the employee handbook cannot prevent a warranted search from taking place. The reason is that it is the duty and responsibility of all employees to sign in the allocated space. Their signatures are an indication of their compliance with the companys rules and regulations. Such stipulations apply to all the employees at Makestuff without any exceptions. Mr. Yourprops argument that he failed to sign the handbook therefore is not valid and cannot inhibit a warranted search from taking place. 6. The purpose of the security checkpoint at the entrance is to ensure the protection of the companys working environment and employee safety. The security personnel at the checkpoint have the authority to seize any items that may be harmful to the firm. In this regard, the security staff at the checkpoint can be directed to search Mr. Yourprops briefcase and seize digital evidence. The reason is that the checkpoint is the main point of entry and exit into and out of the companys premises. If Mr. Yourprop is allowed to leave without being frisked, he may maliciously give the firms source code for the new product to other market players, thus causing harm to the companys financial position if the competitors use the source code to make the product. However, the corporation should begin with establishing that there is a high probability of finding digital evidence by searching his personal items at the checkpoint. The law stipulates that the scope of a search should be limited to place s that are reasonably established to be potential sources of evidence (Dharmapala and Miceli, 2012). Buy custom Digital Forensics in the Criminal Justice System essay