Speed Data – ing!

The below article was recently published in the first edition of The Forensic Investigator Magazine. To view the magazine click here.

Do you feel that you are alone?  May be working long hours, fed up with vast amounts of phone data.  You may have a ‘Good Sense of Humour’, but communications data is getting you down.  Are you the sort that likes to eat out and enjoy socialising, but unfortunately you are stuck in front of a computer for hours on end, creating call schedules?  If you can relate to this so far, then you are probably a Law Enforcement Analyst or a Detective tasked to deal with mobile phone data.  Do not despair…there is an alternative.

We are all aware of the importance of telephone records in the fight against crime.  For many years it has been suggested that criminals will become wise to the usage of their call data records in serious crime investigations.  In fairness, there are some examples that support that theory, however it does not appear to have had any significant impact on reality.

Criminals now, as they did before, usually have the need to communicate with associates prior to and during the commission of their unlawful behaviour.  Some are aware of the investigators techniques, but continually get caught out.  Others use so called ‘dirty’ phones with a discipline to restrict their contacts and frustrate investigations.  It remains the case that thorough interrogation of call data records can usually overcome these avoidance techniques and produce pivotal evidence against those defendants.

Some may say business as usual then, however the truth is that there is now a greater opportunity to identify even more mobile phones and devices that are subject to historic records that can be examined.  If criminals choose to use multiple phones, then there is likely to be more data.  If phones are frequently discarded, then again there will be additional records available.  GPRS data (internet connectivity) is also available in abundance.  In the present financial climate, it is doubtful if any intelligence unit has been able to expand to meet the growth in data interpretation.

The same problem, but viewed from another perspective, identifies the need for accuracy in the tabling of call records.  The inference is clear, if the call data is not processed correctly, then any interpretation of those schedules can be flawed.  Or putting it more directly, they may be totally unreliable and inadmissible.  It is also suggested that there is a chance that opportunities are missed.

Be mindful, although the exhibits that are produced are always prepared with a level of care that would be appropriate to the creation of honest and reliable evidence, it is far too common an occurrence to see errors in the detail of the schedules that become apparent immediately before trial or worse still, during the giving of evidence.

So what goes wrong, what is so awful that can derail a prosecution?  Examples include; the target number removed and replaced with another defendants number; cell identities referred to being that of the ‘other party’; 36 second calls being shown as 36 minutes; diverted calls incorrectly labelled; ‘missed call SMS’ shown as contacts; omissions of incoming calls and the list goes on.

You may be shouting at this article by this point and believing that issues have been exaggerated, but be assured, there is a problem which needs addressing.  It can often be the case that time constraints limit the amount of time available in preparing schedules and it is presumed that all work is reviewed before being released, but this cannot be correct otherwise errors would not be made.

It is perfectly reasonable to ask who is responsible and what steps are being taken to resolve the issue.  However, the problem is a little deeper than that.  Errors are not restricted to Law Enforcement staff, errors also occur in the work presented by service providers that the prosecution rely upon.

There are several so called solutions on the market and they will have varying suitability to work that is encountered.  The purpose of this article is not to promote one software package above another or to create nervousness about working with the data records.  The intention is to highlight the opportunities that exist.

We utilise software (FICS) on a daily basis, the program processes tens of thousands of rows of call data from all U.K. networks, creating multiple phone schedules colour coded with cell site information and azimuth (bearing) details.  The software deals with each file of data in seconds, not minutes and not hours.  The data output is tested and reliable.  There is a consistency or standardisation of the format of data, the schedule becomes any easy read.  There is much more that can be achieved such as statistics and contacts from a schedule of this type, but it must be reliable in the first place. The key to success has to be the quality of the foundation that it relies upon.

No need to be lonely, no need to spend hours creating schedules, no need to make errors.  By considering what is available and taking advantage of ‘good’ opportunities can save significant amounts of time and money.  Appropriate Software can also provide that solid and reliable foundation that analytical work thrives upon.  Making the analysis of telecoms data ‘dynamic’ has not been easy, but the benefits are not to be ignored.