To License or Not to License Reexamined: An Updated Report on State Statutes Regarding Private Investigators and Digital Examiners

In this update to the 2012 year\u27s study, the authors examine statutes that regulate, license, and enforce investigative functions in each US state. As before, the authors find that very few state statutes explicitly differentiate between Private Investigators and Digital Examiners. There is a small trend in which some states are changing definitions or moving to exempt DE from PI licensing requirements. However, we look at some additional information in terms of practicing attorney exemptions that may cloud the licensing waters. As with the previous research studies (Lonardo et al., 2008, 2009, 2012) the authors contacted all state regulatory agencies where statutory language was not explicit, and as a result, set forth the various state approaches to professional Digital Examiner licensing. Our recommendation remains the same: states must differentiate between Private Investigator and Digital Examiner licensing requirements and oversight. In this update to the 2012 year\u27s study, the authors examine statutes that regulate, license, and enforce investigative functions in each US state. As before, the authors find that very few state statutes explicitly differentiate between Private Investigators and Digital Examiners. There is a small trend in which some states are changing definitions or moving to exempt DE from PI licensing requirements. However, we look at some additional information in terms of practicing attorney exemptions that may cloud the licensing waters. As with the previous research studies (Lonardo et al., 2008, 2009, 2012) the authors contacted all state regulatory agencies where statutory language was not explicit, and as a result, set forth the various state approaches to professional Digital Examiner licensing. Our recommendation remains the same: states must differentiate between Private Investigator and Digital Examiner licensing requirements and oversight

To License or Not to License Reexamined: An Updated Report on Licensing of Digital Examiners Under State Private Investigator Statutes

In this update to the 2015 study, the authors examine US state statutes and regulations relating to licensing and enforcement of Digital Examiner functions under each state’s private investigator/detective statute. As with the prior studies, the authors find that very few state statutes explicitly distinguish between Private Investigators (PI) and Digital Examiners (DE), and when they do, they either explicitly require a license or exempt them from the licensing statute. As noted in the previous 2015 study there is a minor trend in which some states are moving to exempt DE from PI licensing requirements. We examine this trend as well as look at some additional information in terms of exemptions including those relating to practicing attorneys, employer/employee relationships, expert testimony, and penalties for violation of the PI statutes where it is believed a PI license is required. As with the previous studies (Lonardo et al., 2008, 2009, 2012, 2015) we reviewed all state statues relating to PI licensing. Where statutory language did not explicitly address exemption or inclusion of Digital Examiners, we contacted the relevant state regulatory body (i.e., Secretary of State’s office, State Police, regulatory agency) to assess the applicability of Digital Examiners under the respective state statues. Based on this statutory review and regulatory feedback we present the various state approaches to professional Digital Examiner licensing. Our recommendation remains the same: states must differentiate between Private Investigator and Digital Examiner licensing requirements and oversight

To License or Not To License Updated: An Examination of State Statutes Regarding Private Investigators and Digital Examiners

In this update to the 2009 year\u27s study, the authors examine statutes that regulate, license, and enforce investigative functions in each US state. After identification and review of Private Investigator licensing requirements, the authors find that very few state statutes explicitly differentiate between Private Investigators and Digital Examiners, but do see a trend of more states making some distinction. The authors contacted all state regulatory agencies where statutory language was not explicit, and as a result, set forth the various state approaches to professional Digital Examiner licensing. As was the case in the previous two iterations of this research, the authors conclude that states must differentiate between Private Investigator and Digital Examiner licensing requirements and oversight

A Legal Examination of Revenge Pornography and Cyber-Harassment

This paper examines the current state of the statutes in the United States as they relate to cyber-harassment in the context of revenge porn . Revenge porn refers to websites which cater to those wishing to exploit, harass, or otherwise antagonize their ex partners using pornographic images and videos which were obtained during their relationships. The paper provide examples and illustrations as well as a summary of current statute in the United States. The paper additionally explores some of the various legal remedies available to victims of revenge pornography

To License or Not to License: An Examination of State Statutes Regarding Private Investigators and Digital Examiners

In this paper the authors examine statutes that regulate, license, and enforce investigative functions in each US state. After identification and review of Private Investigator licensing requirements, the authors find that very few state statutes explicitly differentiate between Private Investigators and Digital Examiners. After contacting all state agencies the authors present a distinct grouping organizing state approaches to professional Digital Examiner licensing. The authors conclude that states must differentiate between Private Investigator and Digital Examiner licensing requirements and oversight

To License or Not to License Revisited: An Examination of State Statutes Regarding Private Investigators and Digital Examiners

In this update to the previous year\u27s study, the authors examine statutes that regulate, license, and enforce investigative functions in each US state. After identification and review of Private Investigator licensing requirements, the authors find that very few state statutes explicitly differentiate between Private Investigators and Digital Examiners. After contacting all state agencies the authors present a distinct grouping organizing state approaches to professional Digital Examiner licensing. The authors conclude that states must differentiate between Private Investigator and Digital Examiner licensing requirements and oversight

Legal Issues Regarding Digital Forensic Examiners Third Party Consent to Search

This paper focuses on Federal law as it relates to consent to search relating to Fourth Amendment privacy in the practice of Digital Forensics. In particular, Digital Examiners should be aware of how decisions in Federal Court may impact their ability to acquire evidence in both civil and criminal settings. Digital Forensics, being a relatively new field, is particularly subject to change as cases and appeals are decided. This paper provides an overview of relevant case law relating to issues in Digital Forensics. More importantly, our research provides Digital Forensic Examiners (DFE), as defined by Lonardo, White, and Rea (Lonardo, 2008, 2009), with scenarios that illustrate the various nuances when dealing with the consent to search. From issues of common authority, conflicting consent, apparent authority, and voluntary consent, our research explores court findings and applies them to practical advice and policy formation for DFEs.</p

Legal Issues Regarding Digital Forensic Examiners Third Party Consent to Search

This paper focuses on Federal law as it relates to consent to search relating to Fourth Amendment privacy in the practice of Digital Forensics. In particular, Digital Examiners should be aware of how decisions in Federal Court may impact their ability to acquire evidence in both civil and criminal settings. Digital Forensics, being a relatively new field, is particularly subject to change as cases and appeals are decided. This paper provides an overview of relevant case law relating to issues in Digital Forensics. More importantly, our research provides Digital Forensic Examiners (DFE), as defined by Lonardo, White, and Rea (2008, 2009), with scenarios that illustrate the various nuances when dealing with the consent to search. From issues of common authority, conflicting consent, apparent authority, and voluntary consent, our research explores court findings and applies them to practical advice and policy formation for DFE

Closing Water Cycles in the Built Environment through Nature-Based Solutions: The Contribution of Vertical Greening Systems and Green Roofs

Water in the city is typically exploited in a linear process, in which most of it is polluted, treated, and discharged; during this process, valuable nutrients are lost in the treatment process instead of being cycled back and used in urban agriculture or green space. The purpose of this paper is to advance a new paradigm to close water cycles in cities via the implementation of naturebased solutions units (NBS_u), with a particular focus on building greening elements, such as green roofs (GRs) and vertical greening systems (VGS). The hypothesis is that such “circular systems” can provide substantial ecosystem services and minimize environmental degradation. Our method is twofold: we first examine these systems from a life-cycle point of view, assessing not only the inputs of conventional and alternative materials, but the ongoing input of water that is required for irrigation. Secondly, the evapotranspiration performance of VGS in Copenhagen, Berlin, Lisbon, Rome, Istanbul, and Tel Aviv, cities with different climatic, architectural, and sociocultural contexts have been simulated using a verticalized ET0 approach, assessing rainwater runoff and greywater as irrigation resources. The water cycling performance of VGS in the mentioned cities would be sufficient at recycling 44% (Lisbon) to 100% (Berlin, Istanbul) of all accruing rainwater roof–runoff, if water shortages in dry months are bridged by greywater. Then, 27–53% of the greywater accruing in a building could be managed on its greened surface. In conclusion, we address the gaps in the current knowledge and policies identified in the different stages of analyses, such as the lack of comprehensive life cycle assessment studies that quantify the complete “water footprint” of building greening systems.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio