Defenses to Cyber Crime Allegations
Prior to beginning work on this discussion read the Brenner, Carrier, & Henninger (2004), and Hernacki (2012) articles. Review the instructions and research a minimum of one additional scholarly source to support your work.
Traditional notions of due process, legal defense, and fairness apply to cyber crimes just as they apply to any other notion of more traditional criminal allegations. Throughout your readings this week you have learned that there are two fertile areas for a defense to a cyber crime allegation: factual and legal.
A factual defense can easily be summed up by the inimitable legal scholar, Mr. Bart Simpson, of the long-running animated television series, The Simpsons. Bart routinely asserts the factual defenses to allegations of wrong doing as, “I didn’t do it; nobody saw me do it; there’s no way they can prove anything.”
These are all valid and somewhat comprehensive definitions of a factual defense. A legal defense, on the other hand, deals with the government’s inability to overcome a defense based on the law in areas such as jurisdiction, vagueness of the law(s), double jeopardy, statutes of limitation, etc.
Include the following elements in your 400 word initial post:
Define and examine both factual and legal defenses to cybercrime allegations.
Your examination must include at least one scholarly source beyond this week’s required readings.
Explain which of these two types of defense is the most likely to prevail in the greatest number of cyber crime cases and provide a rationale for your choice.
Evaluate ways in which future laws can limit defenses to cyber crime allegations.
Articles
Brenner, S. W. (2006). Cybercrime jurisdiction (Links to an external site.). Crime, Law and Social Change, 46(4), 189-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10611-007-9063-7
The full-text version of this article is available through the ProQuest database in the UAGC Library. This article examines the concept of jurisdiction and the difficulty of applying traditional notions of jurisdiction to cyber crime allegations.
Greenberg, A. (2007, July 16). The top countries for cybercrime (Links to an external site.). Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/2007/07/13/cybercrime-world-regions-tech-cx_ag_0716cybercrime.html
This short article explains the rankings of international cyber crime nations and how the notion of sovereignty impeded international cyber crime investigations.
Accessibility Statement does not exist.
Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)
Hernacki, A. T. (2012). Vague law in a smartphone world: Limiting the scope of unauthorized access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. American University Law Review, 61(5), 1543-1584.
The full-text version of this article is available through the ProQuest database in the UAGC Library.
This article examines whether or not modern laws are specific enough to provide notice to potential defendants defining cyber crime and whether or not the vagueness of computer laws can provide a meaningful defense to those accused of cyber crimes.
KPMG International. (2011). Cyber crime – A growing challenge for governments (Links to an external site.) [PDF]. Issues Monitor, 8, 1-21.
Retrieved from https://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/cyber-crime.pdf
This article argues for the need for governments to collaborate globally to effectively combat international cyber crimes.
Web Page
Pate & Johnson. (n.d.). Computer hacking and cyberstalking (Links to an external site.). Retrieved from http://www.pagepate.com/experience/criminal-defense/federal-crimes/federal-computer-crimes/
This short, one page attorney web page provides basic information about defenses to cyber crime allegations.
Accessibility Statement does not exist.
Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|
