I'm teaching this week at the National Police University in Norway and have met some very interesting and talented investigators from various services. What is very interesting is the almost total lack of organised defense experts. It is quite fascinating that most cases with computer evidence rely almost totally upon the prosecution expert with no counter from an alternative position.
As I do both prosecution and defense work I can see the pros and cons from both sides but although I do not doubt the integrity of the officers here I do believe that a sound defense requires experts giving testimony from both sides. Even though with the best will in the world the reports should be the same, we both look at the same data, we all know that things get missed and some issues and elements can be explained in more ways than one.
It is does seem that some officers are now beginning to leave the service and set up on their own so I suppose we will begin to see that change. In the UK, of course, we have many defense experts and although one has to wonder about the competence and even integrity of one or two, at least a defendant can be assured of a second set of eyes on the data. Dont get me started on the need for industry control, I can go on all day. Doesn't mean I know how to solve the problem though!
I guess setting up in Norway could be a good thing for someone?