Which of the following would lead an IS auditor to conclude that the evidence collected during a digital forensic investigation would not be admissible in court?
Which of the following would lead an IS auditor to conclude that the evidence collected during a digital forensic investigation would not be admissible in court?
In a digital forensic investigation, the qualifications and expertise of the person collecting the evidence are crucial for ensuring its admissibility in court. If the individual lacks the necessary training or certification in digital forensics, the credibility and reliability of the evidence could be questioned, leading to it being considered inadmissible. Proper handling and collection of evidence are fundamental to maintaining its integrity, and the qualifications of the person collecting the evidence are a key aspect of this process.
B. The person who collected the evidence is not qualified to represent the case.
Option B: "The person who collected the evidence is not qualified to represent the case" would likely lead an IS auditor to conclude that the evidence collected during a digital forensic investigation would not be admissible in court. In legal proceedings, the qualifications and expertise of the individual collecting the evidence are essential factors for determining the admissibility of the evidence. If the person collecting the evidence lacks the necessary qualifications, such as proper training or certification in digital forensics, it could undermine the credibility and reliability of the evidence. Option C ("The evidence was not fully backed up using a cloud-based solution prior to the trial") also raises concerns about the integrity and preservation of the evidence, which could impact its admissibility. However, the qualifications of the individual collecting the evidence are typically more directly relevant to its admissibility in court.