Some questions of specialists’ involvement into computer crime investigation
Date: November 05, 2003Source: Computer Crime Research Center
By:
During the investigation of thefts, economic crimes in the credit-banc system – crimes committed with the help of IT – it’s possible to find computer equipment which either served as the object of criminal attempt, or was the means of committing crimes and had the evidence of criminal activity. Taking this into consideration during the investigative actions such as examination (art. 190 Ukraine's Code of Criminal Procedure), search (art. 178 CCP of Ukraine), withdrawal (art. 179 CCP of Ukraine), reconstruction of the situation and circumstances of events (art. 194 CCP of Ukraine) one can shift the attention to a new object of investigation – means of computer equipment, and also the object of search – information is in the computer memory or in the external carriers – diskettes, disks etc.
The examination of the place where the crime was committed gives the examiner a possibility to find out the time and the place of the intrusion into the system, the way of intrusion and breakage of system operation.
A typical peculiarity of such examination is the fact that between the place of the direct criminal actions and the place, where their results can be materialized can be a great distance (for example, in different countries). That’s why in case of unauthorized intrusion into computer work, systems and computer nets, the investigation includes:
a) traces on the magnetic carriers used by the criminal;
b) traces on the “transit” magnetic carriers through which the criminal directly contacted the informational resources;
c) traces on the magnetic carriers of informational system which was intruded.
Except the examination of the place of the crime (rooms where computer equipment is installed, and with the help of which the crime was committed) it is necessary to examine computer equipment which became the instrument of the crime, or the database of which became the object of the crime, and also its documents.
If the examination of rooms doesn’t have any difficulties and its tactic doesn’t differ from the examination of other crimes, the examination of computer equipment and its parts, and the search of information, which is kept in electronic form, demands a special training from people engaged in this process. It is necessary to follow some rules of electronic equipment use.
That’s why in order to achieve the most effective results people with special knowledge (SK) and skills should be involved into crime investigation, according to the ar.128-1 CCP of Ukraine.
Law doesn’t indicate what one should understand as SK. Though, in the literature it was paid enough attention to the definition of this word. And though there is no common point of view, the majority of authors associate its interpretation with the term “speciality”.
Here are several formulations, which, in general, reflect this point of view. “The knowledge of professional experience is considered as SK.” “As SK one should understand total knowledge obtained at the end of professional training what gives its owner the possibility to solve problems in a definite sphere.”
“Special knowledge – it is not popular or well-known knowledge which is widely spread, but in plain words, it is knowledge which has a limited group of specialists.” Such interpretation of the idea of SK coincides with the general notion of an expert as a representative of a certain speciality, and a certain field of knowledge.
Technical knowledge as well as scientific one is considered to be a SK.
Technical knowledge transformation into a special form of knowledge is connected with the first industrial revolution and the following development of technologies. But for quite a long period of time technical knowledge was not the object of research. Now the situation has changed and there are series of new works in which its specification is studied.
Technical knowledge includes as elements of scientific so elements of practical knowledge. Scientific elements are represented in it by different scientific-technical theories, which are based on nature-scientific laws, and practical elements of the knowledge are based on receptive rules, which consist of the main contest of technological process descriptions, individual kinds of work etc.
Specialists in crime detection have not yet agreed on one general point of view concerning the definition of SK. Some authors think, that SK is that one which have or doesn’t have the prosecution (detectives, judges etc.), others are sure that this knowledge is not well-known and popular, but it is obtained as a result of education in a special sphere or professional experience.
I.V.Postika thinks that special knowledge is whole knowledge in a definite field with the modern level of its development. It may seem that this definition limits, to some extent, the sphere of usage of SK because it excludes non-process form of its usage. G.E.Morozov gives his definition: SK is the knowledge, which a person has in a certain sphere – chemistry, biology, mathematics or physics, pedagogies or linguistics.
V.I.Shikanov marks that the term SK is used to define any possible knowledge (practical experience, skills), except well-known knowledge, (i.e. that which is obligatory) and knowledge in the sphere of law (but one should not take training and practical skills connected with criminal asses of real circumstances of events and the decision of the questions of process character).
To our mind, SK is a system of modern knowledge in a definite sphere of science, technology, art and trade. It is obtained as a result of special training or professional experience and is used to investigate a crime, to take operatively researching measures, to carry out expert and judicial investigation.
SK also includes experience and skills. Skills are actions which can be fulfilled perfectly, quickly, economically and correctly (for example, an investigator has skills of photo-camera use, measuring and searching equipment). Experience is a capability of a man to work in new and sometimes extreme conditions quickly, effectively and properly.
Speaking about forms of applying of SK in the science of criminology there are no common opinions. For example, V.D.Arsenev and A.M.Goldmun think that in criminal code there are only two forms of SK applying: examination and specialist’s involvement in the investigation.
G.G.Zuykov defines independent forms:
a) direct applying of SK in science, technology, art and trade by the investigator;
b) examinations;
c) inspections;
d) consulting help of a specialist without his direct participation in the investigation;
e) specialist’s involvement into investigation.
V.Y.Koldin and B.G.Goncharenko indicate 3 processing forms of SK use – by investigator, specialist and expert.
Studying forms of SK use in criminology authors, as a rule base their theories on the norms which define rights and duties of the subjects which participate in the investigation. To our mind, it’s important to take into consideration both the aim of SK use and way of its realization. These two characteristics form the difference between processing forms of their applying during the first part of the investigation and trial, and also indication of rights and duties of subjects, which use them.
Specialists may be persons who have knowledge in different fields of science, technology, art and trade, including colleagues from expert institutions. As for the method of SK realization there are two kinds of specialist’s participation: obligatory and optional. Sometimes a specialist is involved into the investigation only in case of necessity. His main duty is to use his professional knowledge and skills to help an investigator to find evidence. Procedural form of SK use is defined by law and determines the relations between an investigator and a specialist in the process of prejudicial investigation. It is the most effective way of SK use because when a specialist is directly involved into the investigation it is possible to discover a lot of important details.
A successful investigation of a crime, as a rule, is provided by concentration of procedural and non-procedural forms of specialists’ knowledge use.
The Criminal Code of Ukraine doesn’t limit specialist’s actions and doesn’t forbid him to carry out legal evaluation. As investigator can involve a specialist to the preparations of the investigation, to instruct him to take necessary measures, a specialist can give professional advice to an investigator. Specialist’s consultations and explanations don’t have any proving meaning and should not be fixed into the records of the search.
Some authors define non-procedural forms of SK use. V.G.Goncharenko suggested a division of the use of natural and scientific sciences in the criminal legal proceedings in procedural (investigative, judicial, expert) and non-procedural (operative and individual examination of materials by an investigator or a judge).
Non-procedural involvement of specialists in crime investigation are not regulated by the norms of Criminal Code. It includes:
a) consultations of an investigator with specialists on those questions which require SK;
b) inquiry activity of a specialist (on behalf of an investigator);
c)...
Next
Add comment
Email to a Friend
