There is a shortage of police and prosecutor office staff who truly understand how things like e-mail, websites, and peer-to-peer networks work in the United States and probably other countries as well.

To be honest, it can be kind of amusing watching people talk about Internet technologies when they don’t really understand it. There are entire websites dedicated to the kinds of things I used to hear regularly when I managed the tech support department for a regional Internet Service Provider.

Part of my job there was processing subpoena’s for local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. I can’t count the number of times I needed to not only produce data to comply with court orders but also provide a crash course in what the data actually means. This includes pointing out to people that really did not understand that someone could be on a Comcast cable internet connection at home and still send mail from their user@xyzcompany.com address. The Internet is both more simple and more complex than many people realize.

I learned quickly that people of all ages are scattered throughout our criminal justice system. These people are being asked to address computer related crime or complaints from citizens where some or all of the potential crime takes place via the Internet. When the police or a prosecutor tries to tackle these matter — with the best of intentions — they can end up creating a lot more problems for victims, suspects, and wastes a lot of time and resources.

In this week’s Forum On Risks To The Public In Computers And Related Systems mailing (subscribe here) at ) there is a story that really illustrates why changing technology is such a challenge for law enforcement folks that are not prepared to properly investigate complaints that involve technology.

Mark Hamblett, Mistaken Identity in Civil Rights Lawsuit
Bronx [NYC] resident William Hallowell filed suit in the Southern District yesterday claiming police and prosecutors blundered by wrongfully arresting him for an e-mail he never sent.

Mr. Hallowell was working part time at the Riverdale Country School Library in April 2007, and exchanging e-mails about the return of a library key with his supervisor, Robin Berson, when Ms. Berson inadvertently typed the wrong e-mail address - to a Ben Hallowell.

She received in return an unsigned e-mail saying the recipient had sold the key for “hookers,” a “handful” of drugs and a gun. The writer also professed his desire for Ms. Berson and proposed a sexual liaison in the library.

The lawsuit alleges that, on a complaint from Ms. Berson, New York City police, “Despite the obvious lack of evidence against him,” arrested William Hallowell and held him for more than 30 hours.

The complaint, charging false arrest and malicious prosecution, states, “Determined to make an arrest, any arrest, defendants bluntly violated Mr. Hallowell’s rights by turning a blind eye to the overwhelming evidence of his innocence,” and blames prosecutors for waiting for four months to dismiss the case. The Bronx County District Attorney’s Office declined comment.

This, I realize, is an extreme example, but it could have all been avoided with a quick perusal of the e-mail messages with intact mail headers would have quickly clarified the situation and avoided this huge mess.

The New York Times reported on this July 10th in an article titled Suit Says Man Was Arrested for Nasty E-Mail Message He Didn’t Write.

In the suit, which names New York City and several police officers as defendants, Mr. Hallowell, 24, says that the officers “deliberately and maliciously ignored a mountain of evidence” that proved that he did not send the offending message.

In an interview, he added that the officers did not even seem to understand how e-mail addresses work.

“I said it to them literally, ‘I don’t know,’ countless times. ‘That’s not my name.’ ‘That’s not my e-mail.’ ‘I did not send that.’ “

The harassment charge was dropped last August, the lawsuit said, because of a lack of evidence, but only after Mr. Hallowell made three court appearances over four months.

With any luck, cases like this will result in prosecutor offices and other law enforcement agencies either hiring on-staff technologists or making use of experts as contractors. So much other stuff has been outsourced by local, state, and federal agencies that it shouldn’t be hard to put a contract for an on-call geek out for bids.

Mr. Hallowell clearly had his civil rights violated, his personal reputation dragged through the mud, and his life interrupted by multiple court appearances and over twenty-four hours behind bars on top of the injustice of being arrested for a crime he knew nothing about. This is not an “oops” - this is an American life seriously harmed by a lack of technical competence on the part of New York City law enforcement personnel.

Justice should be blind, but not computer illiterate.