U.S. v AOL: AOL case was a lawsuit involving collusion between the executives from AOL and PurchasePro Inc. (PPRO) with the sole intention of overstating revenue. The 37% overstated revenue would make executives to believe that PurchasePro Inc. had achieved its sales forecasts, which would in turn contribute to inflation of the company's stock price. Due to their contributions, some of the executives involved in this illegal agreement and fraud would obtain large bonuses and the company's stocks. However, the jury in the case acquitted the three defendants in the much publicized five-year investigation into fraudulent accounting practices between AOL and PurchasePro. Notably, the case offers an example of criminal offenses conducted through the use of computers and necessitates the use of computer forensic tools and procedures in order to resolve.

The Use of a Computer to Commit the Crime:

As previously mentioned, U.S. v AOL is a lawsuit involving fraudulent initiatives by executives from AOL and PurchasePro Inc. To overstate revenue in order to eventually inflate the stock price of PurchasePro Inc. And obtain huge bonuses and stocks in return. Even though the jury in the case acquitted the three defendants, they committed a crime that involve the use of a computer. Actually, AOL accepted responsibility for its employee's misconduct and agreed with the government to pay a penalty in order to avoid prosecution for 2 years (Kolz, 2007). The agreement enabled the company to avoid being prosecuted for any other conduct associated with PPRO transactions including statements, accounting, omissions, and disclosures.

The case basically involved the use of computers to facilitate the performance of the crime in various ways. Some of these major ways computers could...

Computers may have also been used to commit the offense through creating and transmitting fraudulent documentation indicated the inflated or overstated revenue and using it to show these illegal practices to executives, marketing, and press releases.
Certified Professionals that could have been used in the Case:

Since this offense may have involved the use of computers as previously shown, the lawsuit could have involved the use of certified professionals who could have played a crucial role in the determination of the case, especially for the prosecution's testimony. An example of a certified professional who could have been for this case is a Specified Agent, who is knowledgeable and enforces the law. The agent would know when a search warrant or subpoena would be required to prevent the questioning of the case or its loss in court. The significance of this professional is attributed to the fact that he/she will carefully examine evidence, conduct interviews, generate a timeline of events, and try to ensure that guilty people are charged and prosecuted. The second example of certified professionals who could be used in the case is a computer forensics examiner because of his/her knowledge in computer forensics examination, especially on tools used to conduct the examination ("Certification: GCFE," n.d.). The special agent would have influenced the prosecution's testimony by enhancing the credibility of witnesses through conducting interviews and preparing them in court. On the contrary, the computer forensics examiner would enhance the prosecution's…