The legal aspects of corporate e-mail investigations

Computer Law and Security Review

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 372-376

  Taylor, M ^a   Haggerty, J ^a   Gresty, D ^b  

^a LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Computer forensics; E mail evidence; E mail investigation

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER FORENSICS; E-MAIL ARCHIVES; E-MAIL EVIDENCE; E-MAIL INVESTIGATION; LAW-ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES; LEGAL ASPECTS;

INTERNET; LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

ELECTRONIC MAIL;

EID: 67650248663     PISSN: 02673649     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clsr.2009.05.006     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. ACPO. Good practice guide for computer-based electronic evidence, version 4 (2007), The Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and N. Ireland. http://www.acpo.police.uk
2. CJA. UK Criminal Justice Act 2003 (2003). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
3. Copland v. United Kingdom. Times law reports/2007/24 April (Application No 62617/00); 2007.
4. CPIA. UK Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (1996). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
5. DPA. UK Data Protection Act 1998 (1998). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
6. EA. UK Employment Act 2002 (2002). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
7. EnCase. EnCase, guidance software (2009). http://www.guidancesoftware.com
8. ER. UK Employment Rights (Dispute Resolution) Act 1998 (1998). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
9. ETA. UK Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (1996). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
10. FTK. Forensic tool kit, accessdata (2009). http://www.accessdata.com
11. Grossman P. The importance of being retentive. Compliance Monitor 18 5 (2006) 25-26
12. Haggerty J., and Taylor M. Managing corporate computer forensics. Computer Fraud & Security 2006 6 (2006) 14-16
13. Haggerty J, Taylor M, Gresty D. Determining culpability in investigations of malicious e-mail dissemination within the organisation, WDFIA 2008, Workshop on Digital Forensics and Incident Analysis, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain; 9th October 2008.
14. Hilley S. The corporation: the non-policed state. Infosecurity Today 1 6 (2004) 36-37
15. HO. Protecting human rights (2009), UK Home Office. http://security.homeoffice.gov.uk/ripa/legislation
16. HRA. UK Human Rights Act 1998 (1998). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
17. ITLT. Sackings for lewd Bart Simpson e-mail abuse. IT Law Today 9 4 (2001) 11
18. ITLT. Who is reading your e-mails. IT Law Today 14 7 (2006) 6
19. Mason S. Managing e-mail. New Law Journal 153 7071 (2003) 397-401
20. Money Laundering Regulations. Statutory instrument 2003 no. 3075 (2003). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
21. PACE. UK Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (1984). http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/operational-policing/powers-pace-codes/pace-code-intro
22. Penwell Publishing (UK) Ltd v. Ornstien and others. All England official transcripts, EWHC 1570 (QB), HQ06X02998; 2007 [Transcript] [119]-[147].
23. R (on the application of NTL Group Ltd) v. Ipswich Crown Court and another. EWHC 1581 (Admin), CO/4970/2001; 2002.
24. Regina v. Stanford. Times law reports/2006/7 February, Court of Appeal, Criminal Division; 2006.
25. RIPA. UK Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (2000). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
26. SOA. UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 (2003). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
27. SOCPA. Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (2005). http://www.opsi.gov.uk
28. Sommer P. Directors and corporate advisors' guide to digital investigations and evidence (2005), Information Assurance Advisory Council, Cambridge, UK. http://www.iaac.org.uk
29. Surguy M., and Smith A. The investigation minefield: a guide. New Law Journal 155 7165 (2005) 290-294
30. Treacy B. Confidence and data protection. Privacy and Data Protection 9 3 (2009) 2-3
31. VP. E-mail spoofing, Victoria Police, Victoria, Australia (2007). http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document-ID=1094