東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Evidence Tampering in the Digital Er...

Alon, Guy,

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Evidence Tampering in the Digital Era = = בידוי ראיות בעידן הדיגיטלי /

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Evidence Tampering in the Digital Era =/ Guy Alon.
其他題名:	בידוי ראיות בעידן הדיגיטלי /
作者:	Alon, Guy,
面頁冊數:	1 electronic resource (220 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-03, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International86-03A.
標題:	Forgery. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31480220
ISBN:	9798384347231

Evidence Tampering in the Digital Era = = בידוי ראיות בעידן הדיגיטלי /
Alon, Guy,

Evidence Tampering in the Digital Era =בידוי ראיות בעידן הדיגיטלי /Guy Alon. - 1 electronic resource (220 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-03, Section: A.

That research sought to expand the current literature regarding the issue of the possibilities of evidence tampering in the digital era. To date, the main approach in the manner argues that the law of evidence provides an adequate response to the existing conditions, which is demonstrated by changing the rules of evidence from rules of admissibility to rules of weight and overall assessment. However, a preliminary study that took place before that research, has raised a major concern, which is the concern that rules of evidence do not provide (and cannot provide, according to their definition today) an adequate response to the existing difficulties, with an emphasis to technological developments and the implications on the judicial process. First, during our research proposal, the relevant theoretical approaches of the laws of evidence were examined. After examining the three main approaches, the traditional approach, the deontological approach, and the economic approach, we have reviewed the current legal situation regarding the manner. Our review has illustrated that the digital age carries with it a fundamental risk of evidence tampering and wrongful estimation of evidence, when the modern law of evidence is increasing that probability, due to the indifference by courts to attempts to mislead them or submit evidence that is fabricated, inadmissible or invalid for any other reason. Following these concerns, a study was conducted from three aspects, divided into three articles. The first article illustrated how forgery technologies at levels that could not be detected, and that from a systemic point of view - there is no other option that is technologically appropriate. The second article dealt with a different issue: how sensitive and aware the court is of attempts to mislead it, and how recent are the sanctions established by law regarding perjury, false testimony, and obstruction of legal practice. The second article has discovered that the offenses of practicing law are far-fetched, and that the only sanction inherent in dissimulation or deception in general from the false use of evidence is often giving it minor concern. The third article was based on the first two articles, which showed the ease of detection as well as the indifference of the courts to the issue. The third conclusion, as described in the third the article, has suggested to change the standard of proof and the method of decision when we were concerned with a legal proceeding on the basis of digital evidence. The standard of proof that is proposed to be adopted, according to this study, is the general judicial-making strategy as proposed in the Israeli legal literature.

English

ISBN: 9798384347231Subjects--Topical Terms:

3509393
Forgery.

Evidence Tampering in the Digital Era = = בידוי ראיות בעידן הדיגיטלי /
LDR:03959nmm a22003853i 4500 001 2432097
005 20250626110604.5
006 m o d
007 cr|nu||||||||
008 261011s2024 miu||||||m |||||||eng d
020 $a 9798384347231
035 $a (MiAaPQD)AAI31480220
035 $a (MiAaPQD)Haifa9920048305102791
035 $a AAI31480220
040 $a MiAaPQD $b eng $c MiAaPQD $e rda
100 1 $a Alon, Guy, $e author. $3 3821205
245 1 0 $a Evidence Tampering in the Digital Era = $b בידוי ראיות בעידן הדיגיטלי / $c Guy Alon.
264 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2024
300 $a 1 electronic resource (220 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-03, Section: A.
500 $a Advisors: Menashe, Doron.
502 $b Ph.D. $c University of Haifa (Israel) $d 2024.
520 $a That research sought to expand the current literature regarding the issue of the possibilities of evidence tampering in the digital era. To date, the main approach in the manner argues that the law of evidence provides an adequate response to the existing conditions, which is demonstrated by changing the rules of evidence from rules of admissibility to rules of weight and overall assessment. However, a preliminary study that took place before that research, has raised a major concern, which is the concern that rules of evidence do not provide (and cannot provide, according to their definition today) an adequate response to the existing difficulties, with an emphasis to technological developments and the implications on the judicial process. First, during our research proposal, the relevant theoretical approaches of the laws of evidence were examined. After examining the three main approaches, the traditional approach, the deontological approach, and the economic approach, we have reviewed the current legal situation regarding the manner. Our review has illustrated that the digital age carries with it a fundamental risk of evidence tampering and wrongful estimation of evidence, when the modern law of evidence is increasing that probability, due to the indifference by courts to attempts to mislead them or submit evidence that is fabricated, inadmissible or invalid for any other reason. Following these concerns, a study was conducted from three aspects, divided into three articles. The first article illustrated how forgery technologies at levels that could not be detected, and that from a systemic point of view - there is no other option that is technologically appropriate. The second article dealt with a different issue: how sensitive and aware the court is of attempts to mislead it, and how recent are the sanctions established by law regarding perjury, false testimony, and obstruction of legal practice. The second article has discovered that the offenses of practicing law are far-fetched, and that the only sanction inherent in dissimulation or deception in general from the false use of evidence is often giving it minor concern. The third article was based on the first two articles, which showed the ease of detection as well as the indifference of the courts to the issue. The third conclusion, as described in the third the article, has suggested to change the standard of proof and the method of decision when we were concerned with a legal proceeding on the basis of digital evidence. The standard of proof that is proposed to be adopted, according to this study, is the general judicial-making strategy as proposed in the Israeli legal literature.
546 $a English
590 $a School code: 1445
650 4 $a Forgery. $3 3509393
650 4 $a Behavior. $3 532476
650 4 $a Evidence. $3 583147
650 4 $a Legitimacy. $3 3564151
650 4 $a Trials. $3 623874
650 4 $a Decision making. $3 517204
650 4 $a Electronic documents. $3 3562415
650 4 $a Criminal law. $3 562467
650 4 $a Court hearings & proceedings. $3 3562070
650 4 $a Israeli literature. $3 3821206
650 4 $a Judges & magistrates. $3 3562075
650 4 $a Criminology. $3 533274
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
650 4 $a Literature. $3 537498
690 $a 0627
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0401
710 2 $a University of Haifa (Israel). $e degree granting institution. $3 3771917
720 1 $a Menashe, Doron $e degree supervisor.
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 86-03A.
790 $a 1445
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2024
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31480220