The Legal Implications of BYOD

With so many of us using our personal phones and iPads for work (Bring Your Own Device), I thought that this article from the InfoLawGroup would be worth a read.

"... The first rule of policy development and compliance is to create policies that can be followed and will be followed when implemented. Policies should not be aspirational and should reflect the “reality on the ground” as closely as possible. If certain BYOD activities are already taking place, it may be necessary to develop policies that reflect those activities or terminate or limit certain activities on a going forward basis ..."

"... Overall, the policy and control set around BYOD should be made flexible enough to deal with unusual situations. This is especially important in the BYOD context because personal device technology and risks are constantly evolving at a very rapid pace ..."

"... Device configuration requirements may include enabling wiping/bricking capabilities of a device, disabling automatic back-up or cloud storage of data stored on a device, prohibiting the use of a personal device as a mobile hotspot, requiring or prohibiting certain application installation, enabling auto-patching for operating systems and applications, and prohibiting jail breaking or modding of devices. The policy will often also require employees to install mobile device management or other software on personal devices. These system, software and configuration requirements often vary depending on the particular type of personal device and/or operating system, and may need to be updated when new devices are being used or new security vulnerabilities discovered ..."

Crowdfunding your next venture?

It's hard to start a business. It's even harder to start a technology company - given the huge up-front costs. With the rise in success stories from people who've used Kickstarter for creative projects, some are considering micro-finance or crowd funding as a source of venture capital.

As attractive as it might sound, the JOBS Act adds a ton of complexity. Here's a great article on the subject that breaks down the real issues that you need to consider before going down that road.

Social media strategy?

Here's an interesting article on the emerging trend of developing a social media strategy for high-profile court cases.

Are you on Twitter? Facebook? Do you use these for personal or professional purposes? It's an interesting read to see where folks are taking social media these days.

Speed up video preview in PS CS6

Adobe's Julieanne Kost addresses Photoshop's slow video preview, "to preview video faster in Photoshop, zoom out until the height of the canvas is less than 540 pixels. At this smaller preview size, Photoshop CS6 automatically plays and scrubs at lower resolution (and therefore faster)."

Enjoy.

Frame skipping in PS CS6

If you're concerned about frame skipping when working with video in Photoshop, here's a cautionary note from Adobe's Julieanne Kost, "... if the project has audio, and the audio button is ON, Photoshop will skip frames as necessary (regardless of the Allow Frame Skipping setting) to keep up with the audio (in real time)."

more to like about AmpedFive

The more I work with AmpedFive, the more I like it. One of the cool features, especially for those in a Frye state, is the reporting feature.

AmpedFive's automatic report generation feature includes the sequence of all operations applied to all files, the used parameters and a detailed description of their usage and implementation. It also has links to the relevant science behind the operations. How cool is that?

AmpedFive Professional is the perfect addition to your tool kit. It's purpose built for the forensic analysis of video and images. Check out a demo today. I think that you'll like it.

Enjoy.

PremierePro - under the hood

Here's a good reason to process video on a CUDA capable workstation.

When Premiere Pro is just using the CPU for the processing of scaling operations, it uses the following scaling methods:

• playback: bilinear
• paused: Gaussian low-pass sampled with bilinear
• high-quality export (Maximum Render Quality off): Gaussian low-pass sampled with bilinear
• Maximum Render Quality export: variable-radius bicubic

The variable-radius bicubic scaling done on the CPU is very similar to the standard bicubic mode in Photoshop, though the Premiere Pro version is multi-threaded and optimized with some SSE instructions. Even with these optimizations, it is still extremely slow. For high-quality scaling at faster-than-real-time processing, you need to use a CUDA card.

When Premiere Pro is using CUDA on the GPU to accelerate the processing of scaling operations, it uses the following scaling methods:

• playback: bilinear
• paused: Lanczos 2 low-pass sampled with bicubic
• export: Lanczos 2 low-pass sampled with bicubic

For export, scaling with CUDA is always at maximum quality, regardless of quality settings. (This only applies to scaling done on the GPU.) Maximum Render Quality can still make a difference with CUDA-accelerated exports for any parts of the render that are processed on the CPU. Over time, we are working on reducing the list of exceptions to what can be processed on the GPU. For an example of a limitation that can cause some rendering to fall back to the CPU, see this article: “Maxium dimensions in Premiere Pro CS5″.

When rendering is done on the CPU with Maximum Render Quality enabled, processing is done in a linear color space (i.e., gamma = 1.0) at 32 bits per channel (bpc), which results in more realistic results, finer gradations in color, and better results for midtones. CUDA-accelerated processing is always performed in a 32-bpc linear color space. To have results match between CPU rendering and GPU rendering, enable Maximum Render Quality.

Note: There are two places to enable or disable Maxium Render Quality—in the sequence settings and in the export settings. The sequence setting only applies to preview renders; the export setting (which defaults to the sequence setting) overrides the sequence setting.

- source: Adobe.com

Configurator 3 for CS6 is here

With the release of Configurator 3, I'll be hard at work updating the Forensic Photoshop Configurator Panel to version 3. It'll be uploaded to the book's secure site soon (version 1 [CS4] and 2 [CS5] are still available).

Enjoy.

Exporting video from Photoshop CS6

If you've captured video, processed it in Photoshop CS6, and are concerned with compression and aspect ratio ... there's good news. In Photoshop CS6, the new export tie-in with Adobe Media Encoder makes it simple to export video. All of your controls are right there on the same screen. No more having to dive deep for compression and aspect presets.

Enjoy.

Which version are you using?

I get a lot of Photoshop questions, either as comments or via e-mail. Most folks fail to include the version of Photoshop they use. Regardless, expectations are that I can help. So ... I've got to keep most versions loaded and ready to go.

Additionally, plug-ins like OptiPix work in CS3, others in CS4, most in CS5 - but few in CS6 (yet). When I'm on the road training folks, it's nice to be able to show them in the version that they use at work. After all, what's the point of showing CS6 when the class is still stuck with CS3? Sure, they can see all the new stuff, but if their agency is broke, they'll still want to be effective within their status quo.

Enjoy.

New police photographer faces tough cross examination

This just in from the Independent.ie: "... Police photographer Sutish Sharma Jeetwooth faced tough cross-examination from the defence team as they probed the thoroughness of his work documenting the scene.

Michaela's brutal killing was the first murder case the young photographer had worked on.

He was called upon the day she died, first to photograph her body, laid down beside the bath, and then the hotel room.

In subsequent weeks he was called again to take pictures of reconstructions in the room.

The defence lawyer asked why he hadn't photographed CCTV cameras near Michaela's room or the sand on the beachfront outside in case there were footprints.

In all cases he said he photographed only what his superior officer told him to.

Counsel for Avinash Treebhoowoon, Ravi Rutnah, asked: "You don't use your technical expertise to take other pictures you deem necessary?"

He also asked: "Do you think in this modern era black-and-white pictures are less likely to assist an investigation than colour?" to which he replied: "I can't say."

Black and white or not, the images are a glimpse into the horror that greeted the young husband who found his wife dead during a honeymoon that was, as the prosecutor put it, so "brutally interrupted."

Export video from Photoshop CS6 with the Adobe Media Encoder

Here's a great new development - use AME to export video from Photoshop. Choose File > Export > Render Video. From the first pop-up menu, select Adobe Media Encoder to choose from the following Format options:

• DPX (Digital Picture Exchange) format is designed primarily for frame sequences that you plan to incorporate into professional video projects using an editor such as Adobe Premiere Pro.
• H.264 (MPEG-4) format is the most versatile, including presets for high-definition and widescreen video, and output optimized for tablet devices or web delivery.
• QuickTime (MOV) format is required for export of alpha channels and uncompressed video. The Preset menu provides additional compression options.

Enjoy.

What's new in Photoshop CS6 - video

This from Adobe: "With a totally redesigned video engine, you can import a wider range of video, audio, and image sequence files. Easily work with popular file types such as the following:

• 3GP, 3G2
• AVI
• DV
• FLV and  F4V
• MPEG-1
• MPEG-4
• QuickTime MOV (in Windows, full support requires separate QuickTime installation)
• WAV

For the complete list, see Supported file formats in Photoshop CS6."

What's new in Photoshop CS6 - video

This from Adobe: "The redesigned, clip-based Timeline panel includes transitions and effects that give finished videos professional polish. Easily change clip duration and speed, and apply motion effects to text, still images, and Smart Objects.

Video Groups combine multiple video clips and content such as text, images, and shapes on a single Timeline track. Separate audio tracks allow for easy editing and adjusting.

The redesigned video engine also supports a wider range of import formats. When you're ready to export final video, Photoshop provides helpful presets and options for the DPX, H.264, and QuickTime formats.

Note: In Windows, you must install QuickTime separately."

Enjoy.

Where are we going?

California has essentially declared war on images (and reason) - requiring "blind" authentication of images that are used in trial. A simple "that's not me," and off we go down the winding hole. In essence, authentication is on everyone's mind these days.

The ruling caught everyone by surprise. The criminal justice system just wasn't ready to dive into this mess. There aren't enough "experts" to go around, there aren't enough commercially available choices to readily perform authentication tasks, and the results ... well, let's just say that people of good will can disagree.

Nevertheless, all is not lost. I've seen what's just around the corner and I like what I see. I've been privileged to kick the tyres of some new software, as well as some completely redesigned stuff from a name that you know. I'll break the news when I'm allowed to.

I just wanted to say that all is not lost. There's affordable software on the horizon that combines image and video processing, detailed reporting, "forensic" viability, and a good training schedule. All the things that we need to tackle this authentication mess.

For the most part, "blind authentication" is a mad man's game. Who can prove a negative? But, if an allegation of forgery is made ... a specific allegation ... then we can test for it. That's what I'm talking about with what's on the horizon.

Stay tuned.

Adobe's Tutorial Builder - a new courtroom presentation tool?

With jury boxes full of folks who tweet and Facebook, it's important to present your case in a way that they're used to seeing. Interestingly, Adobe's Tutorial Builder can be used to build a movie of your processing of video/images in Photoshop.

I'll be working with this a bit more (though it's still in the experimental stage, so I'm not all in yet) now that there's an iPad compatible player.

More to follow ...

nitpicks with Bicubic Automatic

There's an interesting read on the various issues with the new Bicubic Automatic setting in Photoshop CS6 over in the Adobe Forums.

Enjoy.

Bicubic Automatic

Cool. I've got the new version and I'm getting it set up and I see this:

I'm not a fan of anything "automatic." So, a little digging is in order. Here's what I found out.

This from Photographyuncapped.com: "By just having ‘Bicubic Automatic’ checked in the CS6 preferences, all Photoshop functions will default to Adobe’s best choice for the method. No muss. No fuss. Photoshop will decide the best way forward for you. If you want to override this setting on a case-by-case basis, you still can choose other methods in the Image>Image Size dialog under Resampling Method. And, of course, if you want to change this on a continuing basis, the Preferences can be changed at will."

I think I'll stay in control. I'm appreciative of Adobe's efforts to simplify my life ... but ... I'd rather choose the interpolation method.

Enjoy.

Adobe Camera Raw 7

A quick answer to a reader's question about camera model availability in ACR7 can be found at this link. Remember, those that don't upgrade eventually get left behind. Adobe stops supporting past versions of ACR at a certain point determined by their business model. If you have a new camera and an old version of Photoshop - the answer to support questions is generally ... upgrade. In this version of ACR, ACR 7 is not compatible with Photoshop CS5.

Enjoy.

May Day musings

With today's eventual headlines centered around the Socialist themes of May Day, I thought I'd tackle the death of reason and enter a few musings for the record.

A Daubert motion is a motion, raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury. This is a special case of motion in limine, usually used to exclude the testimony of an expert witness who has no such expertise or used questionable methods to obtain the information. Who gets to determine if the witness is/isn't an expert?

Although trial judges have always had the authority to exclude inappropriate testimony, previous to Daubert, trial courts often preferred to let juries hear evidence proffered by both sides. Once certain evidence has been excluded by a Daubert motion because it fails to meet the relevancy and reliability standard, it will likely be challenged when introduced again in another trial. Even though a Daubert motion is not binding to other courts of law, if something was found not trustworthy, other judges may choose to follow that precedent. Of course, a decision by the Court of Appeals that a piece of evidence is inadmissible under Daubert would be binding on district courts within that court's geographic jurisdiction. Brady v. Maryland means always having to say you're sorry ...

The Court in Daubert offered "general observations" of whether proffered evidence was based on the scientific method, although the list was not intended to be used as an exacting checklist: Empirical testing: the theory or technique must be falsifiable, refutable, and testable. Subjected to peer review and publication (yes, those outdated and ancient texts are still valuable as references - who knew?). Known or potential error rate and the existence and maintenance of standards concerning its operation. Whether the theory and technique is generally accepted by a relevant scientific community.

With rationality and reason as a guide, mankind has made great strides over the centuries. As regards Daubert, if one seeks to progress science, why not play by the rules. Have a novel idea. Subject the idea to the scientific method. Test it. Improve it. Write it down. Share it with others. Have them repeat your tests. Did they come to the same results? If not, why? If yes ... great. Refine. Test more. Publish ... followed by the inevitable profiteering book tour.

Hex Searching

One of the interesting aspects of having a blog is that some people will write to you asking about something related that they read elsewhere on the web. While I am generally friendly and prompt in my replies to questions that come from this blog, I'm often left wondering ... why didn't you just ask them?

Here's an example.

California is going nuts with image authentication issues related to law enforcement's use of images from Facebook. Last year, Scott Anderson wrote an outstanding overview of image authentication techniques as his Masters thesis at UC Denver's National Center for Media Forensics.

The reader wants to know about "practical applications" of Scott's thesis as regards law enforcement. My response: he couldn't be more clear. The question had to do with searching hex data for signs that an image had been "Photoshopped."

First, I reminded the reader of Scott's admonition that there is no one "right way" to authenticate images. There are many right ways, some will work better than others. Also, there should be a specific allegation of forgery that can be tested against.

I asked the reader to perform a simple test. Take a picture with your camera phone. Upload it directly to your Facebook account. Log in to Facebook and click on the picture. On the Options tab, click download. You will now have two versions of the picture - the one on your phone and the one downloaded from Facebook. Examine both with a hex editor. Use the find feature and search for terms like Photoshop, Picasa, and so forth. (Scott offers sample search terms in the back of his paper)

Now, open one of the pictures in Photoshop. Do something to it and save it. Open the hex editor again and search for the word Photoshop. What did you find?

In my test, I found multiple instances of the word ... usually following whatever was done by Photoshop.

If you're not familiar with Scott Anderson's thesis, take a minute and read it (well, more than a minute ...). It's a great example of the wonderful work being done in Denver.

Enjoy.

Some Myths and Facts About Science

An outstanding set of quotes from the FJC's How Science Works:

"... Because science is an adversary process in which each idea deserves the most vigorous possible defense, it is useful for the successful progress of science that scientists tenaciously hang on to their own ideas, even in the face of contrary evidence (and they do, they do) ..."

"... There is a very large component of skill in making cutting-edge experiments work. Often, the only way to import a new technique into a laboratory is to hire someone (usually a postdoctoral fellow) who has already made it work elsewhere. Nevertheless, scientists have a solemn responsibility to describe the methods they use as fully and accurately as possible. And, eventually, the skill will be acquired by enough people to make the new technique commonplace."

The take-away from this section of the publication; every scientist who comes up with a new way of examining/processing evidence has a duty to defend it vigorously by documenting it as fully and accurately as possible - then sharing it with the greater community so that this new method will eventually become commonplace.

Enjoy.

Peer Review and Publication

Here's a few nice quotes on the value of peer review and publication from the Daubert Uncensored blog:

"Another pertinent consideration is whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review and publication. Publication (which is but one element of peer review) is not a sine qua non of admissibility; it does not necessarily correlate with reliability, and in some instances well-grounded but innovative theories will not have been published. Some propositions, moreover, are too particular, too new, or of too limited interest to be published. But submission to the scrutiny of the scientific community is a component of “good science,” in part because it increases the likelihood that substantive flaws in methodology will be detected. The fact of publication (or lack thereof) in a peer reviewed journal thus will be a relevant, though not dispositive, consideration in assessing the scientific validity of a particular technique or methodology on which an opinion is premised."

"But how do these considerations affect the admissibility analysis? Significantly. Experts testifying in large-scale litigation are usually leaders in their field—when the outcome depends upon compelling expert testimony, parties ordinarily retain first-string experts. Challenging the experts’ qualifications will almost always be futile, so focusing on peer review and publication will strengthen any challenge to the testimony."

“The ultimate test of a scientific expert’s integrity is her readiness to publish and be damned.”

"Haller v. AstraZeneca Pharm. LP, 598 F.Supp.2d 1271, 1296-97 (M.D. Fla. 2009). See generally Kumho Tire, 526 U.S. at 152 (holding that Daubert standards are intended “to make certain that an expert, whether basing testimony upon professional studies or personal experience, employs in the courtroom the same level of intellectual rigor that characterizes the practice of an expert in the relevant field”)."

"Expert witnesses are quick to spew litigation opinions as clear, compelling, beyond doubt, and a no-brainer, when they would never dare to submit those same opinions to the scrutiny of their peers. The experts’ unwillingness to subject opinions to peer review and publication speaks volumes about the scientific reliability of the analyses and conclusions."

Enjoy.

The Dry Run

Here's an interesting angle on Daubert hearings from forensic-psych.com: "By providing a picture of the expert in action under cross-examination, expert depositions commonly serve as "dry runs" for trial preparation. However, Daubert hearings have the advantage of providing a second opportunity to probe the expert, as well as to obtain an otherwise unavailable assessment of the trial judge's attitudes toward the case. In those jurisdictions where depositions do not occur or are not allowed in civil or criminal cases, thus depriving attorneys of the opportunity to perform a dry run of the cross-examination of the opposing expert, a Daubert hearing may serve the purpose of obtaining an equally valuable advance look at the opposing experts' opinions, bases, methodology, and courtroom demeanor. The resultant data can be put to very good use by the attorney in case preparation, mastery of the relevant literature, and the like."

They go on to say ...

"Just as moving for an unnecessary examination for competence to stand trial may aid the attorney in laying a foundation (if only in the public's mind) for a later insanity plea, moving for an unnecessary Daubert hearing may lay the foundation for later efforts to impeach the expert's reasoning on scientific grounds. Even if the expert's opinion is ultimately not excluded, the knowledge gained in the process (the dry run suggested in the prior section) may be helpful to the attorney in designing more effective cross-examination for trial."

Further more ...

"The motion for a Daubert hearing may constitute no more than an attempt at simple harassment of the experts, designed to shake their confidence in their own testimony by a threshold challenge to their approach, methodology, reasoning, and professional acceptance of the experts' theory of the case."

If you're in the game ... know the players and the rules.

Enjoy.

Daubert and criminal justice

Over on LinkedIn, some have suggested that Daubert really isn't as helpful in criminal cases as it has been in civil courts. Here's an opinion from Peter J. Neufeld, JD, on defending science.org: "An analysis of post-Daubert decisions demonstrates that whereas civil defendants prevail in their Daubert challenges, most of the time criminal defendants almost always lose their challenges to government proffers. But when the prosecutor challenges a criminal defendant’s expert evidence, the evidence is almost always kept out of the trial. This is true in both federal and state courts. And even though Frye remains the test in more than a dozen states, criminal defendants fared no better under Frye. In the first 7 years after Daubert, there were 67 reported federal appellate decisions reviewing defense challenges to prosecution experts. The government prevailed in all but 6, and even among the 6, only 1 resulted in the reversal of a conviction. In contrast, in the 54 cases in which the defense appealed a trial court ruling to exclude the defendant’s expert, the defendant lost in 44 cases. In 7 of the remaining 10, the case was remanded for a Daubert hearing."

While the article is more than seven years old, it's still relevant. It also has a wealth of resources in it's reference list. It begs a lot of questions - mainly, why do privateer experts not fare as well in criminal cases? Is money really the issue?

Interesting none the less.

I'm off to Louisiana

I'm heading out the door, going to Baton Rouge for the Louisiana Association of Forensic Scientists meeting next week. I'm looking forward to presenting two days of Photoshop training at the meeting. If you're in the NOLA or Baton Rouge area ... look me up.

See you soon.

Premiere Pro CS6: what’s new and changed

Click here for a quick blog post about Premiere Pro CS6. I'm looking forward to seeing Adobe Prelude CS6.

Forensic Photoshop Book - promo pricing

If you've been waiting to get the book, the wait's over ... Blurb is offering promotional pricing on orders of 2 or more books from their web site. Use offer code ORDERUP to receive 20% off your order. But, act soon. The offer ends on May 2, 2012.

Google Apps and e-discovery

From Australia's Image & Data Manager: "An ediscovery application has been launched for Google Apps known as Vault aimed at reducing the costs of litigation, regulatory investigation and compliance actions.

Google says Vault provides extended management and information governance capabilities to proactively archive, retain and preserve Gmail and on-the-record chats.

It offers the ability to search and manage data based on terms, dates, senders, recipients and labels to give management, IT, legal and compliance users a systemised, repeatable and defensible platform.

Google Apps Vault can be added to an existing Google Apps account for an additional $US5 per user per month.

“It will be very hard for IT managers to justify the cost of expensive on-site email archiving when all the old data can be migrated to the cloud for $5 a user. The cloud continues to deliver economies of scale that organisations can no longer ignore.”

Check out Google Vault by clicking here.

Enjoy.

Get a sneak peek at Adobe Audition CS6

One of the more difficult tasks in managing evidentiary multimedia is taking the audio from a body-worn recorder and merging it with various sources of covertly recorded video. Often times, the body-worn recorder produces the best audio, but the body-worn video misses the hand-off or the face shot. Thus, an investigator will want the better audio inserted into another video feed from the operation (pole cam, hand-held, etc.).

For this reason, I'm looking forward to the release of Audition CS6. According to Adobe, "Automatic Speech Alignment: Designed to align overdub dialogue quickly with existing production audio, the new automatic speech alignment feature does much more than merely align initial transients. When used on overdubbed dialogue, Adobe Audition analyzes the frequency spectrum involved as well as the waveforms, so each word of a dialogue clip is matched to its counterpart in the production audio—the real power is a new algorithm to provide alignment of noisy location audio to reduce mis-alignment. If you have ever worked with ADR or overdubbing, you know that this is a time consuming task and our goal was to provide a powerful tool to help make it a little easier. There’s no replacement for the skill and craft involved in professional ADR, but if you have an overdub performance which matches the location audio’s wording and phrasing, but the timing is off for lip sync, the new automatic speech alignment can help. Where you might normally perform a “stretch” on the audio to fit the timing, or be forced to do lots of editing/compositing to line up each word or phrase, automatic speech alignment can help you get good results quickly."

Yes, I know. This feature is designed for a production environment. Well, Photoshop is for photographers, and we love it in law enforcement. I think that the more LE folks get used to Audition, the more they'll love it. I can't wait to try this with body wire/body-worn matching for field operations.

Enjoy.

Deconvolution

To answer a recent question on the meaning of the term "deconvolution," I'll refer you to several texts referenced in the following citation from the world's greatest on-line source of information: "In optics and imaging, the term "deconvolution" is specifically used to refer to the process of reversing the optical distortion that takes place in an optical microscope, electron microscope, telescope, or other imaging instrument, thus creating clearer images. It is usually done in the digital domain by a software algorithm, as part of a suite of microscope image processing techniques. Deconvolution is also practical to sharpen images that suffer from fast motion or jiggles during capturing. Early Hubble Space Telescope images were distorted by a flawed mirror and could be sharpened by deconvolution.

The usual method is to assume that the optical path through the instrument is optically perfect, convolved with a point spread function (PSF), that is, a mathematical function that describes the distortion in terms of the pathway a theoretical point source of light (or other waves) takes through the instrument.[3] Usually, such a point source contributes a small area of fuzziness to the final image. If this function can be determined, it is then a matter of computing its inverse or complementary function, and convolving the acquired image with that. The result is the original, undistorted image.

In practice, finding the true PSF is impossible, and usually an approximation of it is used, theoretically calculated[4] or based on some experimental estimation by using known probes. Real optics may also have different PSFs at different focal and spatial locations, and the PSF may be non-linear. The accuracy of the approximation of the PSF will dictate the final result. Different algorithms can be employed to give better results, at the price of being more computationally intensive. Since the original convolution discards data, some algorithms use additional data acquired at nearby focal points to make up some of the lost information. Regularization in iterative algorithms (as in expectation-maximization algorithms) can be applied to avoid unrealistic solutions.

When the PSF is unknown, it may be possible to deduce it by systematically trying different possible PSFs and assessing whether the image has improved. This procedure is called blind deconvolution.[3] Blind deconvolution is a well-established image restoration technique in astronomy, where the point nature of the objects photographed exposes the PSF thus making it more feasible. It is also used in fluorescence microscopy for image restoration, and in fluorescence spectral imaging for spectral separation of multiple unknown fluorophores. The most common iterative algorithm for the purpose is the Richardson–Lucy deconvolution algorithm; the Wiener deconvolution (and approximations) are the most common non-iterative algorithms."

1. O'Haver T. "Intro to Signal Processing - Deconvolution". University of Maryland at College Park.
2. Wiener N (1964). Extrapolation, Interpolation, and Smoothing of Stationary Time Series. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. ISBN 0-262-73005-7.
3. Cheng PC (2006). "The Contrast Formation in Optical Microscopy". Handbook of Biological Confocal Microscopy (Pawley JB, ed.) (3rd ed. ed.). Berlin: Springer. pp. 189–90. ISBN 0-387-25921-X.
4. Nasse M. J., Woehl J. C. (2010). "Realistic modeling of the illumination point spread function in confocal scanning optical microscopy". J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 27 (2): 295–302. doi:10.1364/JOSAA.27.000295.

Adobe Camera Raw 7

Here's a snapshot of Adobe Camera Raw 7's Basic tab. Notice anything different? I thought that you would.

Putting this amount of luminosity control within ACR is so cool. I'm liking CS6 already.

Photoshop CS6 Beta: Training for your test drive

Want to get a head start on the next generation of digital imaging? First, download the Photoshop CS6 Beta. Then, check out the these tutorials to discover the revolutionary new features.

Enjoy.

New Features in CS6

If you are interested in a concise list of the new features in CS6, click here.

Remember, it's a beta ... so the shipping version will be a bit different. And ... as always ... validate your tools before using them for casework.

Enjoy.

Photoshop CS6 Operating System Support

This just in from Jeffrey Tranberry: "I’m pleased to announce that we’ll be providing official support for Windows XP, in addition to Windows 7, with Photoshop CS6.

We know that some of our Windows customers were concerned about Photoshop CS6 dropping Windows XP support similar to Lightroom 4.

We will, however, be dropping official support for Windows Vista (Please note: although Windows Vista is not officially supported, we do not restrict users from installing and using Photoshop CS6 on their Vista Systems)

Why is Photoshop CS6 still supporting Windows XP?

Quite simply, Photoshop’s user base is much different than Lightroom’s and many more of our customers are still on Windows XP. However, the number of our customers on XP is decreasing and we expect to see more and more of our customers to migrate to Windows 7 and Windows 8.

Macintosh

On the Mac side, we made the decision to end support for Macintosh systems that are not 64-bit capable. See related Apple documentation: How to tell if your Intel-based Mac has a 32-bit or 64-bit processor?

Apple is no longer supporting 32-bit hardware with their latest operating system, Mac OS X 10.7 (Lion), so it makes sense for us to follow suit.

Current recommendations and future guidance

Our current recommendation for the best Photoshop experience is to use 64-bit hardware and Operating Systems, specifically Mac OS X 10.6.x (Snow Leopard) or 10.7.x (Lion) for Macintosh and Windows 7 64-bit for Windows PCs.

We’re actively working with Apple to create a great Photoshop experience with future releases of OS X, including the recently announced Mac OS 10.8 (Mountain Lion).

We’re also working with Microsoft to also create a great Photoshop experience with Windows 8 for when it becomes available ..."

Enjoy.

Adobe Photoshop CS6 Beta

The world’s best digital image editing software is about to get even better. Explore Adobe® Photoshop® CS6 beta for a sneak preview of some of the incredible performance enhancements, imaging magic, and creativity tools we are working on. Discover for yourself why Photoshop CS6 software will be a whole new experience in digital image editing.

Here's the link to the public beta site.

Enjoy.

Shooting tethered?

Even though I don't recommend Lightroom for law enforcement use, it's still a valuable tool for photographers. With the newest marketing campaign from Hasselblad, a reader writes in confused about tethering.

Purchasers of the H4D will get Lightroom 4 as part of the package. That's cool. But, the H4D doesn't tether with LR4 ... yet.

From Hasselblad: "The Hasselblad and Lightroom plan does not mean that Hasselblad's Phocus software is being phased out.

Said Russell-Fish: "We will continue to support our proprietary Phocus software. This new agreement is about providing choice for our customers. Lightroom has the advantage of familiarity with photographers, digital operators and enthusiasts worldwide. Phocus still offers high-end imagists some highly specialised tools and remains an integral element of our Multi-Shot cameras as well as our Phocus Mobile application, which enables wireless connectivity for the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch. We are also working on solutions to tethering and batch processing challenges, and integration of those solutions is not far off."

Click here to learn more about tethering.

Click here for a list of supported cameras.

Enjoy.

Is a badge on Foursquare worth your life?

This just in from the US Army: "There are a number of location-based social media applications and platforms, including Foursquare, Gowalla, SCVNGR, Shopkick, Loopt and Whrrl, currently on the market. They use GPS features, typically in the user's phone, to publish the person's location and offer rewards in the form of discounts, badges or points to encourage frequent check-ins.

Security risks for the military:

A deployed service member's situational awareness includes the world of social media. If a Soldier uploads a photo taken on his or her smartphone to Facebook, they could broadcast the exact location of their unit, said Steve Warren, deputy G2 for the Maneuver Center of Excellence, or MCoE.

"Today, in pretty much every single smartphone, there is built-in GPS," Warren said. "For every picture you take with that phone, it will automatically embed the latitude and longitude within the photograph."

Someone with the right software and the wrong motivation could download the photo and extract the coordinates from the metadata.

Warren cited a real-world example from 2007. When a new fleet of helicopters arrived with an aviation unit at a base in Iraq, some Soldiers took pictures on the flightline, he said. From the photos that were uploaded to the Internet, the enemy was able to determine the exact location of the helicopters inside the compound and conduct a mortar attack, destroying four of the AH-64 Apaches.

Staff Sgt. Dale Sweetnam, of the Online and Social Media Division, said geotagging is of particular concern for deployed Soldiers and those in transit to a mission.

"Ideally, Soldiers should always be aware of the dangers associated with geotagging regardless of where they are," he explained.

General hazards for family members:

While especially relevant for those in the military, cautions about geotagging extend to anyone who uses that feature.

Facebook is in the process of rolling out Timeline, a new layout that includes a map tab of all the locations a user has tagged.

"Timeline presents some unique security challenges for users who tag location to posts," Sweetnam said.

"Some of those individuals have hundreds of 'friends' they may never have actually met in person, he explained. "By looking at someone's map tab on Facebook, you can see everywhere they've tagged a location. You can see the restaurants they frequent, the gym they go to everyday, even the street they live on if they're tagging photos of their home. Honestly, it's pretty scary how much an acquaintance that becomes a Facebook 'friend' can find out about your routines and habits if you're always tagging location to your posts."

Most of the applications let people limit who can see their check-ins to friends or friends of friends.

"A good rule of thumb when using location-based social networking applications is do not become friends with someone if you haven't met them in person," Sweetnam said. "Make sure you're careful about who you let into your social media circle."

Even if there is nothing classified about an individual's location, a series of locations posted online over the course of a month can create a pattern that criminals can use.

"We live in a different world now," Warren said.

"If someone were going to get a hold of your phone, they could figure out a lot about who you are. It's like a beacon that's always out there communicating with towers and plotting your moves on a computer somewhere. Literally, if you don't turn off that feature on your phone people are going to be able to recreate your whole day."

Ways to stay safe:

"In operations security, we talk about the adversary," said Kent Grosshans, MCoE OPSEC officer. "The adversary could be a hacker, could be terrorists, could be criminals; someone who has an intent to cause harm. The adversary picks up on pieces of information to put the whole puzzle together."

Grosshans suggests disabling the geotagging feature on your phone and checking your security settings to see who you're sharing check-ins with.

"If your husband's deployed and you go ahead and start posting all these pictures that are geotagged, now not only does an individual know your husband's deployed and he's not at home, but they know where your house is," he said.

Ultimately, it's about weighing the risks.

"Do you really want everyone to know the exact location of your home or your children's school?" Sweetnam said. "Before adding a location to a photo, Soldiers really need to step back and ask themselves, 'Who really needs to know this location information?'"

Grosshans said it's as important to Soldiers as to family members.

"Be conscious of what information you're putting out there," he said. "Don't share information with strangers. Once it's out there, it's out there. There's no pulling it back."

Enjoy.

Daubert, Frye … or Both? Tracking Florida’s Buy-In

This just in from the BullsEye Blog: "For the second consecutive year, the Florida legislature is considering a bill that would change the standards for admission of expert witness testimony in Florida state courts. Slowly inching its way through the legislature, the bill suffered setbacks on March 8 when Senate amendments altered the language – and ostensibly the bite – of the original bill approved by the House in February.

At issue is whether Florida should adopt its own statutory version of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert, and throw out the long-standing Frye standard currently employed in Florida state courts. If you’re waiting to see which direction Florida will ultimately go regarding the current Frye v. Daubert debate, don’t hold your breath. Opinions differ across the board, and the ultimate answer, if any, may be a little of both. ..."

"On February 24 the Florida House voted to approve HB 243, which sought to amend section 90.702 of the Florida Statutes by conforming the standards for admission of expert testimony in Florida state courts to those used in federal courts. Specifically, the bill sought to require that admission of expert testimony in Florida state courts be held to the same standards contained in Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and factors articulated in Daubert.

Florida currently uses the Frye standard in evaluating the admissibility of expert witness testimony. The Frye standard – considered by many to be less stringent than its federal counterpart – generally focuses on whether the underlying scientific principles are sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in their field.

The original House bill sought to openly reject the Frye standard and replace it with the federal factors enumerated in Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the standards spelled out by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert and its progeny. ..."

"On March 8th, the amended version of the bill was adopted and passed by the Senate. The amended bill now awaits action from the House. If ultimately enacted into Florida law, the bill is slated to take effect July 1, 2012. ..."

Click here to read the rest of the story and find out what the folks are saying about this development.

Enjoy.

Law Enforcement Forensics Day at Photoshop World

This just in from Adobe's John Penn II:

Save the Date! Friday, March 23, 2012

You are invited to join Adobe and leading digital forensics experts for a full day of training. At this unique event, we will take you deep into topics that will help you become more effective in photography and using Adobe Photoshop® and other tools for digital media analysis and investigation.

You will learn about:
• Advances in the science of image verification and the detection of manipulation
• Advanced camera technologies, including high-resolution crime-scene capture
• Photographic techniques
• Video, still, and audio workflows for investigations
• Accurate image color capture and calibration
• Digital media analysis with Photoshop
• Forensic artist use of Photoshop... and more

Speakers include:
• Dr. Richard Vorder Bruegge, FBI senior photographic technologist
• Kevin Connor, President, and Hany Farid, CTO, of Fourandsix Technologies
• Glenn Miller, Forensic Artist at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
• John Penn, Adobe Sr. Solutions Architect for Law Enforcement
• Additional speakers TBA

Who should attend:
• Law Enforcement
• Investigators
• Forensic Professionals

Click here for more info or to register for the event.

Enjoy.

Verifeyed? Not really

I received an e-mail from the folks at Verifeyed.com. They asked to speak with me about their service and how it might apply to forensics.

They claim: "In order to authenticate an image using VerifEyed you must upload the original file unaltered as the device took it. This includes not rotating the image. VerifEyed does have a massive database of device signatures (we estimate 80% of images taken covered) but the technique itself uses multiple methods to authenticate." OK, what do you mean by "unaltered?" Can an image be altered and still be authentic? I'd say yes, but more on this later.

They go on to say, "Image authentication without using watermarks and signatures (called the passive or blind approach) is regarded as a new direction and does not need any explicit prior information about the image. The decision about the trustworthiness of an image being analyzed is based on fusion of the outcomes of separate image analyzers."

Needless to say, I was intrigued.

They sent me a trial code and I got out some simple images to throw at their tests. The first round's images were to test images downloaded from Facebook. I used images from my own account. Images that I either took with my own cell phone, or from my camera ... uploaded to my account ... then downloaded to my computer. I these cases, I'm either in the picture or the photographer ... and the camera is mine. Verifeyed.com reported these as not "Verifeyed" but didn't say why (there's no report function).

But wait ... these are my pictures. I'm in most of them. Just because Facebook's script processed it for transport doesn't make it inauthentic - the image's content and context are still the same. Under California's evidence code, I can stipulate as to the authenticity of them because I'm either in them or I took the picture.

Nevertheless, on to test two. I've got some JPEG stills that I saved from a DVR for one of my classes. I uploaded these and Verifeyed.com reported these as not "Verifeyed." Again, no report or reason as to why not. But, I exported the stills and they're authentic. What gives?

In my conversation with their sales and tech crew, it seems that the version that I was testing works almost exactly like JPEGSnoop. It looks at signatures vs. an internal (to them) database. Naturally, with Facebook, there'll be a signature change (as I've already documented). With DVR stills, there's no possible way a signature based solution will be able to keep up with the many different manufacturers and models out there.

They mentioned that getting into "forensics" was a new thing for them, that their primary market was the insurance industry and on-line dating sites. Ouch. Imagine this ... you take a picture of your family next to your new car. You upload the image to Facebook. The next day, your car is totaled with your phone in it. Phone's gone. Car's gone. You download the car's image from Facebook and send it to your insurance adjuster as proof that your car was fine before the crash. They upload your JPEG to Verifeyed.com and it says, "not Verifeyed." Claim denied. What are you to do?

As problematic as this is for the insurance industry, imagine unleashing this on the criminal justice system. Ouch. I'd rather not.

They said that they'd do deeper/additional testing on my images and get back to me with a better, more detailed report. That was almost a month ago. Now, their web site is down.

I'd say that Verifeyed.com is not verified.

Enjoy.

Does Daubert Equal Summary Judgment?

This just in from the BullsEye Blog: "It seems much legal attention has been devoted to Daubert lately – and with good cause. From the 1st Circuit’s Milward opinion last March allowing a less stringent “weight of the evidence” methodology – an approach previously rejected in a 5th Circuit case – to a reported increase in challenges, Daubert seems to be dominating legal headlines.

As the role of experts becomes all the more critical in the world of litigation, many legal commentators are now pondering if a Daubert challenge has become the new summary judgment. In cases requiring expert testimony, courts seem progressively willing to “connect the dots” between a Daubert challenge and summary judgment. Quite simply, failing a Daubert challenge and the resulting exclusion of an expert’s testimony can mean dismissal on summary judgment – and the end of the road for your case.

This is precisely what happened in Bielskis v. Louisville Ladder, Inc. , when plaintiff Raymond Bielskis, who was injured when a scaffold he was standing on collapsed, brought a products liability action against the scaffold’s manufacturer. The district court decided to grant defendant manufacturer’s motion for summary judgment after barring testimony of plaintiff’s expert on grounds the expert’s methodology failed to meet Daubert factors. On appeal the 7th Circuit upheld the decision – concluding that without the testimony of his expert, Bielskis lacked the evidence needed to keep his case afloat, and therefore dismissal on the summary judgment motion was proper.

In cases that require expert testimony to sustain a cause of action or prove a material fact at issue, the message courts are giving is loud and clear – make sure your experts utilize reliable methodology and can withstand a Daubert challenge. Otherwise, your case may be over before it ever begins.

Already this year another U.S. District Court case worthy of Daubert-related discussion may have taken the rationale behind the Bielskis decision one step further. Decided this January, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts excluded an expert’s testimony after a Daubert hearing and then promptly granted summary judgment sua sponte – which means literally “of its own will or motion; voluntarily” – without waiting for a current summary judgment motion from the other side.

The case involved a class action securities fraud case. Plaintiffs had asserted a “fraud-on-the-market” theory of recovery, alleging that misleading reports on which class investors relied in purchasing AOL stock artificially inflated the price and caused investors to suffer harm when the price of the stock declined. To prove their theory of recovery, plaintiffs’ expert relied on an “event study” prepared to measure the impact of defendants’ allegedly misleading statements on the value of the AOL stock. Upon defendants’ motion to preclude the expert’s opinion, the judge convened a full Daubert hearing.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the court found that pervasive fatal flaws in the expert’s methodology rendered his study and testimony inadmissible. In doing so, the court further determined that plaintiffs could not raise a triable issue of fact on loss causation, and without further ado granted summary judgment sua sponte in favor of defendants.

It is worth noting that defendants had made an earlier motion for summary judgment which was denied under a different judge who had retired from the bench before disposition of the case, but the transferring judge didn’t wait for the defendants to bring or renew such a motion. Rather, perhaps in reconsideration of the earlier denied motion, he simply determined that summary judgment was appropriate – and then granted it.

The court was well within its statutory authority – FRCP 56 gives courts latitude to grant summary judgment independent of any motion, following notice and a reasonable time to respond. Although usually accomplished through the motion of a party, the rule authorizes a court to grant summary judgment on its own accord. The Committee Notes on Rules for the 2010 Amendment add clarification, stating “…the court may grant summary judgment for the nonmoving party; grant a motion on legal or factual grounds not raised by the parties; or consider summary judgment on its own.”

Regardless of the rationale behind the judge’s decision in Bricklayers, both this case and Bielskis are deserving of attention from attorneys and experts alike – failing a Daubert challenge can trigger the end of your case under summary judgment, and the courts have wide latitude in making that decision.

For attorneys, it has never been more crucial to choose an expert who utilizes reliable methodology and can withstand a Daubert challenge. Be sure you know your expert’s history and purview of testimony experience, and vet him or her thoroughly to make sure that the scientific methodologies utilized are based on accepted principles in the industry.

Is too much emphasis being placed on experts to make or break a case?

Do you think failing a Daubert challenge should result in dismissal of a case on summary judgment?"

Enjoy.

Daubert Challenges Up 250%

This just in from the BullsEye Blog: "Are Daubert challenges really weeding out “junk science” and “pseudoscience” in the courtroom, or could it be that they are actually scaring off good, competent experts? Given the numbers alone, one can’t help but wonder.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, which established that the criteria set forth in Daubert applied to other types of expert testimony – not just that of a scientific nature – the number of Daubert challenges has risen sharply. While some increase may not be too surprising – after all, the Kumho decision expanded the pool of experts subject to Daubert criteria – what has perhaps left experts and attorneys scratching their heads is the sheer increase in the number of challenges.

According to a PricewaterhouseCooper study, which looked at Daubert challenges post Kumho, the number of Daubert challenges to all expert witness types increased dramatically in the first decade of 2000. The study looked at federal courts and state courts utilizing Daubert and revealed that Daubert challenges to all types of experts have exploded – in the year 2000 the study noted 253 Daubert challenges, and that figure jumps to 879 in the year 2010 – amounting to an almost 250% increase. In fact, 2010 marked the year with the most Daubert challenges ever.

As if those figures aren’t daunting enough, 2010 showed a 49% success rate of Daubert challenges to expert witnesses of all types, either in whole or part. The good news, if there is any, is that the percentage of successful challenges remained fairly stable over the first decade of 2000.

The increase in Daubert challenges has occurred despite the fact that the number of filings, at least in federal court, has remained consistent over the same time period. For example, using information obtained from a website maintained by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts which tracked a 12 month period ending March 31, the year 2001 saw 254,523 total civil cases filed in U.S. District Courts, compared to 282,307 cases filed in 2010. Although a slight increase in filings from 2001 to 2010 is noted, it is hardly in keeping with the almost 250% increase in Daubert challenges measured using roughly the same time frame. U.S. Court of Appeals filings for that same time period were also fairly stable – in 2001 there were 56,067 cases filed as compared to 56,790 in 2010 ..."

"How does coming face to face with a Daubert challenge affect an expert’s future usability?

Failing a Daubert challenge has the potential to be damaging to an expert. Whether a challenge is successful or not, once made, it’s on the record and at minimum throws up a yellow flag for the attorney.

That’s in part because a Daubert challenge goes to the very heart of the scientific methodology an expert uses to reach his or her conclusions – not to the actual conclusions reached – and therefore arguably has the greatest potential for lasting long-term harm. Even more troubling is the fact that sometimes an expert isn’t even aware that there was a challenge until well after the fact – after all, unlike the parties to an action, the expert witness has no true advocate or legal standing in the courtroom. He or she may not even find out about the challenge until after the case is settled or decided, and all the parties, attorneys, and other players in the courtroom have closed their briefcases and gone home.

There is room for argument that, rather than as a method of raising the bar for scientific reliability, Daubert is becoming a federal litigation rite of passage which may be subject to misuse, is scaring off experts, and is almost certainly increasing costs of litigation for everyone.

Convince us Daubert challenges are working – or tell us why they aren’t in the comments below. Would you utilize an expert previously challenged under Daubert? Why or why not?"

Click here to read the rest of the story.

Enjoy.

Three Things to Know About Rule 26

This just in from the BullsEye Blog: "In the world of expert witnesses, staying up to date on Rule 26 is vital. Not following requirements for disclosure and expert reports can break your case.

1. Not Following Directions Can Get You Banned

Earlier this year in Walter International Products Inc. v. Salinas, six expert witnesses were barred from testifying because they did not submit a report according to FRCP 26.

“I was very concerned and shocked when I read that the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an earlier decision striking six experts from testifying at trial,” said expert witness Eugene Peterson of Advise & Consult. “After all, my livelihood is based upon the fact that I write expert reports and testify in court.”

The court stated, “Each witness must provide a written report containing a complete statement of all opinions to be expressed …Any party that without substantial justification fails to disclose this information is not permitted to use the witness as evidence at trial unless such failure is harmless.”

2. Following Directions Includes Having a Complete Expert Report

According to FRCP 26(B), “the report must have:

• A complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them
• The facts or data considered by the witness in forming them 
• Any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them 
• The witness’s qualifications, including a list of all publications authored in the previous 10 years 
• A list of all other cases in which, during the previous 4 years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition 
• A statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case.” 

Cases in which an expert simply consulted do not need to be included, just as articles published more than ten years ago don’t have to be listed."


Click here to read the rest of the story.

Enjoy.

29.97 frames per second?

A helpful student recently pointed out that at the rate of 29.97 frames per second, it would take slightly longer than a second to complete scanning a full 30 frames.

Great observation on his part. But, he wanted to know why. ... Ouch.

To answer the question, we need a bit of a history lesson. When the NTSC (and others) were playing with adding colour to the TV signal in the 1950s, they only had 6MHz of space to play with. With the monochrome system already in place, they had to figure out a way to get the colour in there, within the same space, and make it compatible with the existing equipment.

For those that sat in high school math class thinking, "I'll never need math once I leave school," hang on ... you will.

NTSC B/W line frequency was 15,750 hertz. The folks that were working on this problem found that info modulated on the carrier frequency seemed to be grouping itself around the harmonics of the line frequency, leaving places on the carrier where no info was being carried.

What's a harmonic? A harmonic is a frequency that changes by adding the initial/fundamental frequency to itself, again and again. It would look like 1, 2, 3, 4 ... as one gets added into the mix each time. It's different than doubling ... which would look like 1, 2, 4, 8 ...

Empty spaces were found at the odd harmonics of half the line frequency (7,875 lines per second). Thus, info could be inserted in these spaces without causing interference. Inserting the colour info into these spaces meant that the new colour system would be compatible with the old B/W system.

But ... they chose the 455th harmonic as the color subcarrier frequency (reasons edited out for brevity). The audio carriers were set at 4.5MHz above the video carrier for all TV stations. This means that regardless the TV station's video carrier frequency, the audio carrier was 4.5MHz above it. As a result, they found that the color subcarrier placed in the 455th harmonic caused interference around 900 kilohertz that was visible as black and white wavy lines running through the picture.

To solve the problem, they slowed the existing line frequency by 16 lines to 15,734 per second. All TV sets were built to receive signal within 1% of the line frequency, so that 16 line adjustment wouldn't cause a problem.

This tiny adjustment produced a new frame rate of 29.97 frames per second.

Wow. That was a mouth full. There's obviously more to it than my simplified version. If you're interested, I could recommend a few good books on the subject.

Enjoy.

Thankfully, there's video

From the NY Daily News: "Less than a month after getting busted for allegedly trying to run over a cop, a city worker left court Thursday a free man thanks to video evidence that showed him to be a careful driver.

Felony charges against John Hockenjos, 55, accused of driving at a "high rate of speed," causing the officer "to jump out of the way," were thrown out after a surveillance tape showed the Brooklyn man slowly pulling into his driveway and the cop not even flinching.

"I was very worried. These were very serious charges against me," the MTA engineer said after his ordeal ended. "I was facing seven years in prison."

Officer Diego Palacios made the allegation Feb. 5 after responding to a call by Hockenjos's neighbor.

The driveway of the Sheepshead Bay home is the subject of a long-running civil court fight between Hockenjos and the neighbor.

"The people are moving to dismiss for lack of evidence and in the interest of justice," prosecutor Danit Almog said in Brooklyn Criminal Court Thursday morning.

“There's a larger issue here," said Hockenjos’ lawyer Craig Newman. "You have a police officer who doesn't have the right temperament or judgment to be wearing a badge who's still out there."

The NYPD has confirmed that the Internal Affairs Bureau is looking into the matter.

A summons for disorderly conduct against Hockenjos's wife, Irena, 51, stemming from the same incident, is still pending.

The couple said they are still reeling from the arrest.

"I'm traumatized," said John Hockenjos. "It was the worst experience of my entire life."

He said his lack of trust in the local precinct prevents him from calling cops for help "so I feel vulnerable."

Newman warned that other arrestees may be less fortunate than his client.

"Most cases have no video of what happened," the lawyer said."

ed. note: It's amazing to think of the times that I'm asked if I've ever worked for the defense - as if there was something wrong with that. In this case, and any other like it, I'd gladly work in the defense of an innocent person.

Behind the Splash Screen: Meet John Penn II

A few years ago, John Penn II was invited to attend the Internet Crimes Against Children Conference and share his knowledge as a Photoshop Engineer. The experience changed his life. Now he is a Senior Solutions Architect helping law enforcement agencies around the world use Photoshop to combat the exploitation of children. Watch his interview by clicking here.

Enjoy.

Eleventh Circuit Rules Defendant Cannot Be Compelled to Divulge Encryption Passphrase

From Forensic Focus: "... the Eleventh Circuit has held that a defendant’s “decryption and production of the hard drives’ contents would trigger Fifth Amendment protection because it would be testimonial, and that such protection would extend to the Government’s use of the drives’ contents.”

"... Assuming the Government has a right to inspect all portions of the hard-drives, based on probable cause to believe they were an instrumentality of a crime, then it is appropriate to begin the Fifth Amendment analysis. Under the Fifth Amendment, “[n]o person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” The courts have consistently interpreted this provision as “protect[ing] a person . . . against being incriminated by his own compelled testimonial communications.” Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 409 (1976). Thus, to be afforded the protection, the statement must be: (1) compelled, (2) testimonial in nature, and (3) serve to incriminate the declarant in a criminal proceeding. If these elements are met, the declarant has the right “not to answer questions put to him in any proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings.” Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973) ..."

"... In this case, there was no dispute that defendant had care, custody, and control of the computers and hard-drives. As the sole owner, no one else could have created the encrypted volumes, and the Eleventh Circuit’s opinion does not indicate that defendant claimed someone else had created those volumes. Therefore, it is not clear to me why defendant’s mere knowledge of the passphrase is an admission of guilt, any more than it would be to surrender the a key hanging about his neck, or to surrender the combination code to a safe in a home, that was properly within the scope of a valid search warrant (as these hard-drives were). Knowledge of the passphrase is not an element of the crime, but rather possession of child pornography. (Conversely, a murderer’s knowledge of the secret location of his victim’s grave would be incriminating, because only the murderer would know that location). Therefore, although the court intoned, “the Government appears to concede, as it should, that the decryption and production are compelled and incriminatory,” I don’t agree that the act of decryption and production, by itself, is incriminatory (even though the fruits of that production could contain evidence that is incriminating).

That leaves the question of whether the passphrase is testimonial. The Court noted, “an act of production can be testimonial when that act conveys some explicit or implicit statement of fact that certain materials exist, are in the subpoenaed individual’s possession or control.” Yet, as noted above, it is uncontroverted that defendant had exclusive care, custody, and control of the encrypted volumes, and knows the passphrase, regardless of whether those volumes contain contraband. Citing United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000) and Fisher v. United States, supra, the court relied upon the so-called “foregone conclusion” doctrine, which posits that an act of production is not testimonial—even if the act conveys a fact regarding the existence or location, possession, or authenticity of the subpoenaed materials—if the Government can show with “reasonable particularity” that, at the time it sought to compel the act of production, it already knew of the materials, thereby making any testimonial aspect a “foregone conclusion.” I contend that exception is here met, because it is not in dispute that the contraband was traced back to three separate IP addresses in different hotel rooms rented by defendant, and that there was no other plausible repository for those files to exist but his computer equipment, and this satisfies the “reasonable particularity” requirement."

It's an interesting case in that passwords are present in DVRs as well. Could some crime witnessed by a defendant's DVR be found hiding behind a password?

Click here to read the whole article.

Enjoy.

41 mega pixel camera phone?

Nokia recently made a shocking announcement - they're marketing a 41MP camera phone, the Nokia 808 PureView.

"The Nokia PureView Pro imaging technology is the combination of a large, super high resolution 41Mpix with high performance Carl Zeiss optics. The large sensor enables pixel oversampling, which will be explained in detail in this paper but in a nutshell it means the combination of many pixels into one perfect pixel. PureView imaging technology is the result of many years of research and development and the tangible fruits of this work are amazing image quality, lossless zoom, and superior low light performance."

It's a Europe-only release. But, who knows ... Check out the technology here.

Enjoy.

FSS Closure: Forensics on trial

From the UK's Justice Gap blog: "... The Law Society also expressed concern about the maintenance of quality standards and accreditation. Of particular concern was ‘the risk that unqualified and unaccredited police laboratory staff’ would screen materials before sending on fior expert analysis. Such laboratory staff are not required to comply with accreditation standards (namely ISO 17025) and are not covered by the Forensic Science Regulator. ‘Given the need for police forces to reduce expenditure, we are concerned that there is likely to be a reduction in the number of investigations where forensic science is used. That would cause a contraction in the forensic science market leading to reduced areas of expertise. It would also increase the likelihood of miscarriages of justice and the failure of the justice system to provide justice to victims.’ ‘We are going back to practice in the 1970s when I ended up paying out of my own pocket for forensic scientists to do work for me because we could not get work done under a legal aid certificate.’ Alasdair Logan, the defence lawyer who acted in the Guildford 4 and Maguire 7 cases and who sits on the Law Society’s human rights committee.

The CCRC, in evidence prepared for the House of Commons’ science and technology committee, argued that it its closure would ‘undoubtedly lead to miscarriages of justice not being corrected’.

Under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, section 17 the CCRC has sweeping powers to obtain material held by public bodies and that includes files, materials and samples held by the FSS. Since 2005 it has requested that the FSS preserve or make available material on at least 150 occasions. It has no such power to recover such material from private providers. Shockingly the Commission wasn’t even consulted on its closure. The CCRC has agreed with a clause in the framework agreement which governs the contracts for the provision of private forensic services which, according to case review manager group leader Matt Humphrey, ‘replicates the section 17 powers’. ‘Obviously a contractual right is second best to a statutory power,’ he commented. He said that the CCRC was ‘actively discussing’ the possibility of statutory powers with the MoJ ..."

Click here to read the whole article.

Enjoy.

The Reduction Human Error in Forensic Analysis

A recent report from NIST on Latent Print Analysis sheds some light on potential human errors in all forensic disciplines.

Here's some of the report's suggestions:

• Urging management at forensic service provider facilities to foster a culture in which it is understood that some human error is inevitable and that openness about errors leads to improvements in practice;
• Documenting latent print examinations at a detail level that would permit another examiner to assess the accuracy and validity of the work; 
• Requiring agencies that employ latent print examiners to establish requirements and guidelines for reporting, documentation, and testimony that are reviewed for each examiner at least annually; and
• Intensely preparing print examiners and other forensic experts to give credible and accurate testimony in trials, stressing skills such as using lay language, creating visuals that can easily be understood, and thinking clearly under cross-examination. 

The working group also identified a number of future steps that should be taken to advance the error reduction effort, including: prerequisite educational and skill standards for examiner training; continuing education, mentoring, and accreditation/certification programs; research to integrate automated systems into the early stages of print analysis; and a comprehensive testing program for ensuring examiner competency and proficiency.

An open and shut case

From the UK Guardian: "...The fear is that the ongoing marketisation of forensics will inevitably lead to loss of quality. Alastair Logan predicts a proliferation of what he calls 'toy labs' where work done quickly, cheaply and without quality checks (such as ISO 17025) as police respond to their own pressures to cut costs. "One has only to recall the handling of exhibits in the Stephen Lawrence case to know how poor training and understanding affect the detection of crime," Logan reflects.

Nigel Hodge is a forensic scientist and former reporting officer at the FSS's Chepstow lab. He believes that scrapping the FSS will undermine the development of a sector previously bolstered by the public service ethos of the FSS. "While individual forensic scientists may be primarily concerned with issues relating to justice, the companies that employ them are driven by commercial motives: maximisation of profit, increasing market share, brand identity etc," he reckons.

Then there is what Hodges calls "the whole business of trade secrets" where a forensic services provider develops a new technology this puts him at a competitive advantage. "There is a danger of a 'black box' situation developing where information is put into a system by forensic scientists, and 'evidence' pops out of the other end but where no one really knows what goes on in between." Forensic science shouldn't be like "a secret recipe for fried chicken", he adds. Quite ..."

It's a good thing that here in the US, we have Daubert and Frye - in other words, we scientists have to prove that our methods aren't novel and are reliable and repeatable.

Click here to read the whole story.

Enjoy.

FSS Report from the House of Commons

Here's an interesting read, the UK House of Commons report on the closure of the Forensic Science Service: "...Final conclusions

239. There are many factors to take into consideration when determining what has caused the dire financial position of the FSS. We consider the most significant factor to be the shrinking forensics market, driven by increasing police in-sourcing of forensic science and a forensic procurement framework that drove down prices and did not adequately recognise the value of complex forensic services.

240. The stabilisation of the external forensics market is now of crucial importance. For this to be achieved, the Government must do two things. First, further police in-sourcing of forensic science must be curbed. Second, the National Forensic Framework Agreement, and any successor framework, must be revised to reflect that some forensic science services cannot be commoditised easily into products and ensure that the true costs of forensic services are reimbursed to providers. Without stability through regulation, a properly competitive market cannot be realised. A shrinking market provides no incentive for further investment or growth from any forensic science provider. The success of forensic science providers and their willingness to invest further in forensic science will be threatened if action is not taken to stabilise the market.

241. The process whereby the Government reached a decision on the future of the FSS was taken on legal and commercial bases. If legal and commercial grounds were the only relevant considerations, the Government's decision to close the FSS would be reasonable. However, it is clear that such a decision should not be taken on purely legal and commercial grounds.

242. The Government did not consider enough evidence in its decision-making. The impacts on research and development, on the capacity of private providers to absorb the FSS's market share, on the future of the archives and on the wider impacts to the criminal justice system appear to have been hastily overlooked in favour of the financial bottom line. Examining the possible impacts of a decision after the decision has been made contradicts the concept of evidence informing policy.

243. Proper consideration should now be given to what resources might be irretrievably lost to the UK with the closure of the FSS, including the FSS's archives and the intellectual wealth residing within its scientists. We have seen no detailed plan outlining the transition and the future of the FSS's staff, archives, work and assets.

244. While there would be merits in retaining the FSS as a completely public agency of the Home Office that focuses on R&D, training of forensic scientists, establishing quality standards and maintaining archives, we are not convinced that the separation of forensic science research and provision would necessarily be the ideal solution, because research efforts should feed into and improve service provision. In response to this report we ask for the views of the Government and Transition Board on this matter.

245. The transition deadline of March 2012 is extremely challenging and we are not confident that an orderly transition can be achieved by this date. The Government should extend this deadline by at least six months. Extending the transition deadline would enable the Government to consult on, and determine, what its wider strategy for forensic science should be. The FSS should be supported during this period. The FSS transition should be carefully monitored to ensure that it does not further contribute to market instability or lead to a diminution of service to the criminal justice system. Continuing to support the FSS during this period may add additional costs to the public purse, but we consider that it should be seen as a price worth paying ..."

Click here to read the whole report.

Enjoy.

Stressing Demeanor Credibility: Continued Impacts of Melendez-Diaz for Forensic Scientists

From Ronald K. Bullis, Ph.D., J.D., via ForensicMag: "Forensic scientists begin their testimony even before they speak their first words. Even before they take the oath or recite their qualifications, the jury is assessing their credibility by their demeanor. Simply put, demeanor evidence is the body’s compass, pointing in the direction of credibility. It includes gestures, intonations, posture, mannerisms, eye movements, inflections, and expressions. Judges and juries listen and look very closely to demeanor evidence to assess the credibility of forensic testimony. Research has repeatedly shown that demeanor evidence significantly determines court decisions.1 Recently the U.S. Supreme Court has reinforced the importance of demeanor evidence in the 2009 case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts.

That decision required forensic scientists to personally testify to their research and conclusions. The Melendez-Diaz Court based its decision on the 6th Amendment’s Confrontation Clause and stressed the essential practice of jurors to see and to hear people testify, not just examine affidavits. Forensic Magazine has tracked the progress and discussed the significance of the Melendez-Diaz case for forensic scientists.3 Before Melendez-Diaz, it was common practice for forensic scientists to submit their results by affidavits. This will no longer be the standard practice. Forensic science testimony now requires as much attention to the manner in which they testify as to their scientific research. It is no longer enough to be good scientists, forensic experts need to be effective communicators.

Because it is unlikely they will have had testimony training or education in their formal schooling, forensic scientists will need to get additional training, particularly in communication and persuasion skills, human relations, and relaxation techniques. ..."

Continue reading this article by clicking here.

Enjoy.

Omnivore in the news

Here's a link to an article in the latest edition of Evidence Magazine about processing the video from the Vancouver hockey riots. The real star of that show was Ocean Systems' Omnivore. It really made things easy.

Enjoy.

Facebook is Primary Source for Compromising Information

From the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML): "If your status is separated or going through a divorce, you might want to stay off Facebook. An overwhelming 81% of the nation’s top divorce attorneys say they have seen an increase in the number of cases using social networking evidence during the past five years, according to a recent survey of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML). Facebook holds the distinction of being the unrivaled leader for online divorce evidence with 66% citing it as the primary source.

“Going through a divorce always results in heightened levels of personal scrutiny. If you publicly post any contradictions to previously made statements and promises, an estranged spouse will certainly be one of the first people to notice and make use of that evidence,” said Marlene Eskind Moses, president of the AAML. “As everyone continues to share more and more aspects of their lives on social networking sites, they leave themselves open to much greater examinations of both their public and private lives in these sensitive situations.”

Overall, 81% of AAML members cited an increase in the use of evidence from social networking websites during the past five years, while just 19% said there was no change. Facebook is the primary source of this type of evidence according to 66% of the AAML respondents, while MySpace follows with 15%, Twitter at 5%, and other choices listed by 14%. "

If you'd like to know more about the image authentication tools and techniques that I use for Facebook images, or if you're interested in smart phones as evidence, feel free to drop me a line.

Enjoy.

Video Evidence frees Philadelphia man

From the Phily Daily News: "Riddled with bullets, Timothy "Banger" Ross lay faceup in the doorway of his North Philly home as his family watched the color drain from his face and a pool of blood ooze onto the floor beneath him.

Moments earlier on Oct. 7, 2009, a hail of gunfire had flown through the doorway. One shot came so close to striking Ross' 14-year-old sister in the head that it ripped off one of her braids.

Ross' frantic family knew exactly who did it: Amin Speakes, then 21, who had fought with Ross two hours before the shooting. The cops soon scooped up their man.

What the family and police didn't know at the time, though, is that Speakes had what some would call a rock-solid alibi - two time-stamped videos that placed him miles away from the shooting.

The District Attorney's Office viewed the video and decided to put Speakes on trial anyway.

Denied bail, Speakes turned 22, then 23, while awaiting trial behind bars, often playing chess alone.

Finally, after two years and three months, a jury last month found Speakes not guilty of first-degree murder. Instead of spending the rest of his life in prison, he was finally a free man.

"Here I am facing charges, and I didn't have no clue about what happened," Speakes, 23, said during a recent interview in his attorney's office. "That 'not guilty' verdict made me what I am. If I didn't hear that verdict, I wouldn't be here."

Speakes' case is disturbing not just because he sat in jail for so long for a crime he was cleared of, but also because it begs the question: If the jury got it right, how did the police and District Attorney's Office get it wrong?

"There was just a lot of burying their heads in the sand and not wanting to open their eyes to what really happened here," defense attorney David Nenner said. "This has been a rare experience in my career, where there is video evidence that exonerates somebody. It's not something I typically see."

Click here to continue reading the story.

Enjoy.

Open the flood gates?

This from forensic mag: "... Our scientific understandings have improved in recent years, and the effect of that has to be to say, 'We've got some innocent people who've been declared guilty based on misunderstandings,'" said John Hall, director of analysis and research for the National Fire Protection Association.

For example, decades ago, it was common for investigators to conclude an accelerant like gasoline was used if a fire burned particularly hot. In fact, the new arson science has found no such correlation, experts say. Another mistaken assumption: A V-shaped pattern on a wall of a burned building is proof of arson. All it shows is where a fire started.

One of the biggest arson cases to come under attack is that of Cameron Todd Willingham, convicted in a 1991 fire in Texas that killed his three daughters. He was executed in 2004. But some experts since then have testified that the blaze was probably accidental ..."

This story begs the obvious question, as science changes / evolves, do we necessarily re-examine our work in prior cases? Who makes that call? It's an interesting article.

Enjoy.

Source Monitor and Program Monitor overview

Hey Jim. I can't get Premiere Pro to show my videos smoothly. What gives?

Check out this link and find out how to set up the Source and Program monitors.

Enjoy.

Workflow and overview for exporting from Premiere Pro

You can export video from a sequence in the form best suited for further editing or for a viewing audience. Premiere Pro supports export in formats for various uses and target devices.

Click here to explore all of the options.

Enjoy.