Electronic Discovery and Digital Forensic Evidence Examination

Our Electronic Discovery and Digital Forensic Evidence Examination service is highly regarded as independent, honest, fair, and uncompromising in our search for and honest factual examination of digital forensic evidence. We have built up tools, techniques, and facilities over a period of many years, and we have a strong track record of advancing the state of the art in the examination of and challenges to digital forensic evidence. For more details on our overall approach and methodology, see our clickable diagram on digital forensics.

Our policy on this work is that we will work on any case for any participant as long as: (1) they pay our fees, and (2) we are allowed to seek the truth and present our results in a truthful, fair, complete, and honest manner. We have worked for law enforcement, government, corporations, and defendants, and we do work for indigent defendants as court appointed experts. We believe strongly in the need for fair and honest examination and presentation of factual information about digital evidence. We limit our interpretation to identifying what can and cannot be determined from the available facts and do not enter into baseless speculation. We believe that, in most cases, the best way to be certain of our interpretation is by doing digital crime scene reconstruction, and we rely heavily on experimental methods to confirm or refute our hypotheses about cases.

Here are some examples of recent cases:

Our skills, experience, expertise, and facilities provided the means to resolve these and many other cases to the benefit of our clients. They can help you meet your digital forensic needs as well.

Standard Warning: From time to time, council in cases have tried to engage us to support a position that was untenable. Our policy on this is simple. If you are looking for an advocate for a position, look elsewhere. If you seek the facts and want an honest and fair interpretation of those facts, we may be able to help you.

Here is a report from a widely publicized 2009 case.