I was reading a well researched news story in the aftermath of the Fort Lauderdale protests that turned into a violent confrontation between police and protesters. Several items caught my attention that could have impact on events that result in litigation/discovery during this time of discord. Body Worn Cameras (BWC) and video surveillance are more commonplace now than ever. Many of my industrial clients require that certain employees wear BWCs or have vehicle/facility cameras that operate on similar technologies. I intend to stay away from politics on essays in the eDiscovery Journal. As a former police criminalist I am very interested in evolving technologies to record and reconstruct incidents. In this and many other recent confrontations, police departments state that BWC footage is not available because the cameras were not turned on. Let’s discuss what data is available to an investigator or requesting party.
Hi. This should be the exerrpt.
Stephen E. Arnold’s latest blog on flaky enterprise search reports resonated with my own frustration at the steady stream of eDiscovery market reports press releases showing up in my daily search feeds. I have followed Arnold’s blog for years because of his deep understanding of the enterprise search market. He bluntly calls out the lack of attribution or substance in the reports hidden behind the paywall. I ran down one of the recent eDiscovery Market Forecast 2020-2025 reports blasted out by something called Aeresearch, ‘Powered by Market Study Report, LLC.’ Sounds like another Gartner/Forrester wanna-be, right? Not hardly.