Section I Provide a list of people you believe should be interviewed for this investigation and how they relate to the investigation. What information could they possibly supply?

For this investigation, there will be need to interrogate a number of persons. In so doing, I would be concerned with two key aspects that relate to the investigation: work-related aspects and aspects not related to the workplace. With regard to work-related aspects, I would be seeking to interview those who have closely worked with Mr. John Belcamp, i.e. his workmates and other organizational employees. These would be inclusive of his superiors (Ms. Carol McPherson, Mr. Harold Newman, Mr. John Belcamp, and Ms. Evelyn Bass), his subordinates, those at the same job level, and staff performing various key organizational roles (such as security personnel). This would essentially be a fact-finding undertaking aimed at determining whether there is indeed any possibility of violation of organizational policy or threat to organizational interests. When it comes to aspects not related to the workplace, of relevance would be the character and comportment of Mr. Belcamp. Towards this end, persons of interest would be a few of Mr. Belcamp’s friends and neighbors.

Provide a narrative description of the interview setting and the intended process, before, during, and following the interview

The interview would comprise of four basic stages. These are: planning of the investigation, interview conduction, evidence gathering, and evidence evaluation. In as far as planning is concerned, the items of great relevance would be issue outline, interviewee list, questions to be asked, and documentation format. On the other hand, when it comes to the conduction of interviews, it is important to note that I would first ensure that all the parties involved are aware of the relevance of the investigation and know their rights in as far as their participation is concerned. With every interview, effort will be made to maintain objectivity and impartiality. Evidence gathering, though part and parcel of interview process, could be deemed a stand-alone process due to the distinctive activities involved. This is more so the case when it comes to the documentation processes. Lastly, we have evidence evaluation which is essentially the assessment of the information collected thus far with an aim of determining whether there is indeed any possibility of violation of organizational policy or threat to organizational interests. Once all the information has been evaluated, and issues relating to the credibility of those interviewed resolved, a formal recommendation will be made. It is important to note that to a large extent, the interview setting would be determined by the aspect, i.e. work-related aspects and aspects not related to the workplace. For work-related aspects, the interview would be taken at the work premises to avoid unnecessary disruptions to workflows. On the other hand, for aspects not related to the workplace, the setting would largely be dependent upon the schedule and location of the interviewee.

Explain to the management why these stages are important to a successful interview and investigation

The stages highlighted above are of great relevance to a successful interview and investigation as the investigation has the potential to become a lawsuit. For this reason, there is need to ensure that the entire process is well-structured and documentation rules observed so as to ease the retrieval of key information if need be. In basic terms, the results of the investigation could provide the basis for legal action with the options available for the organization being inclusive of: personal devices subpoena, permanent injunction, or just a restraining order.

Section II

Question 1: Identify, for the lab, what digital or non-digital evidence you would like them to look for and explain why that evidence would be important to the case

In this case, the primary goal would be to determine whether there was any attempt by Mr. Belcamp to steal intellectual property of the organization – and in this particular case, the source code for ‘Product X.’ Thumb drive...

It is important to note that according to Reddy (2019), owing to their portability and storage capacity, thumb drives are tools commonly used by employees to steal data. In the short summary to be submitted to the laboratory, I would request for specific information relating to; the files that were opened recently, stored file, deleted files, and files that were copied to other mediums. With regard to recently opened files, a red flag would be raised if there is evidence to suggest that most or some of the files that Mr. Belcamp opened recently were not related to tasks being performed at the time. Stored files would also be of great interest because as Ms. Evans points out, Mr. Belcamp had instructed her to keep the thumb drive safe. This indicates that it could contain material related to Project X. Deleted files and those copied to other mediums would also be of interest given that Mr. Belcamp could have tried to cover his tracks by either deleting stored data or transferring it to other storage devices.
Question 2: Locations outside of Mr. Belcamp's immediate work space where pertinent digital evidence might be found

Outside of Mr. Belcamp workplace, there are numerous other places or locations where we could find important digital evidence related to the ongoing case. In this case, possible locations would be inclusive of Mr. Belcamp’s smartphone, personal email account, and personal computer. Of interest would...…details the analysis of the expert witness and the conclusions arrived at as a consequence of the said analysis. To ensure that the expert witness is sufficiently cross-examined, the other parties must be furnished with details of the report. Adam (2016) points out that the duty of the expert witness to the court supersedes all other duties (i.e. duty to the employer). For this reason, as an expert witness, I ought to be not only impartial, but also independent. The basis for expert opinion is Rule 702 of the federal evidence rules (Adam, 2016). There are some key differences that exist between expert witnesses and fact witnesses. Unlike an expert witness, a fact witness must ensure that the testimony they offer is largely limited to evidence that is part and parcel of their involvement or observation. Thus, a fact witness is called upon as a consequence of their involvement in undertakings that morphed into the issues before the court. Unlike expert witnesses, fact witnesses are, therefore, not expressly required to have special expert insights, experience, or training in relation to various aspects of the litigation.

Question 9: Transcript in response to: “How do we know you are not biased in this case, choosing to report only what would help law enforcement and your company's bottom-line? How can we know from your work that your analysis should be accepted by the court?”

I support the work of law enforcement because I am a firm believer in the rule of law. I am also a firm believer in the fact that that every accusation and conviction must be founded on clear evidence and not mere heresy. In the present scenario, forensic investigations have clearly indicated that the complete source code for Product X was found in the thumb drive belonging to Mr. Belcamp. I will also clearly indicate that there are other reasons to believe that copies of the source code were emailed to the personal email of Mr. Belcamp by the accused himself. Computer forensics is a scientific process in which case verified methods and approaches are used in an attempt to gather, preserve, or retrieve important data in formats acceptable in a court of law. There is no room for bias. In our case, we have conducted investigations using tools that are peer-reviewed and have undergone verification tests. We have also documented all the procedures that were used in the making of our findings. As an expert witness, mine is only to present truthful, independent, and unbiased expert opinion based on my expertise on the subject matter. It is, thus, up to the criminal justice proceedings to assess the evidence presented, conduct an assessment of presentations, and make a determination of guilt or innocence.…