Defining Cyberstalking

The concept of cyberstalking can be defined as a crime committed by someone who stalks someone using the internet or another electronic device. The terms "cyberstalking" and "online abuse" are interchangeable. It involves persistently intimidating or threatening an individual. There are many ways to stalk someone, including following them to their home or place of business, damaging their property, leaving notes or objects behind, or making obnoxious phone calls. One of the biggest advantages of this kind of crime is the anonymity that is provided to cyber stalkers cyber stalking allows them to keep a check on the activities of their victim without their identity being known to the world.

Therefore, effective cyber tools are required to investigate cybercrimes, be ready to protect against them, and bring victims to justice. Numerous psychological factors, such as extreme narcissism, hatred, rage, retaliation, envy, obsession, mental illness, power and control, thoughts of sadomasochism, sexual deviance, internet addiction, or religious fervor, might be the cause of stalking.

Major factors are provided below:

• Fascination and attraction:
  Obsession and attraction may be the driving forces behind stalking. The victim might be sexually or mentally appealing to the stalker. The line between admiring and stalking is thin.
• Erotomania:
  The stalker tends to believe that the victim, who is typically a stranger or famous person, is in love with him. It always involves someone's sexual propensity.
   
• Retaliation and Hate:
  Even though the victim is not the cause of the stalker's feelings of anger and retaliation, he or she nonetheless becomes the focus of the stalker. The stalker's apparent preferred medium for venting his feelings of retaliation and hatred is the internet.
   
• Distrust:
  Stalking can have a strong jealousy component, especially when it involves former partners and their present companions.
   
• Sexual Harassment:
  It is said to be the main motive behind cyberstalking. This is so because the internet reflects real life.[1]

Based on the aforementioned reasons for stalking, a stalker may be obsessed, furious, psychotic, or otherwise insane. There are three types of stalkers, specifically:

Delusional stalkers are those who feel the need to establish their dominance, vengeful stalkers are those who want to exact revenge, and obsessional stalkers are those who are motivated by their obsession with sexual harassment and occasionally even love.

Victimization of Women

Women and small children are frequently the targets of such activities, which can result in threats, harassment, violence, and trauma. Women are the group most impacted by the growing loss of privacy in both the real world and the virtual world. Cyberstalking is a significant example of a breach of women's online privacy.[2]

In addition, these abnormal behaviors have a significant negative impact on every element of their lives due to the nature of the crime and the target that was intended. Textual victimization and graphical victimization are the two main types of cyber-victimization of women. To humiliate the victim, graphic victimization may involve making, uploading, or distributing obscene, insulting, and pornographic items online.

In many cases, stalking turns into a man's quick response to a woman's rejection to enter into any kind of relationship with him. The situation is much more concerning now that internet trolls use social media platforms and instant messaging apps like WhatsApp to target female activists, journalists, celebrities, academicians, and other professionals to toast the general public these women so they can experience a sadistic pleasure.

On the internet, trolls, bullies, and stalkers specifically target women with rude, libelous, and disparaging words and images. Women may experience harassment and stalking even when they are not online due to pointless phone calls and SMSs. Sometimes, this may lead to a complete ban on women utilizing any such communication channel. This demonstrates a flagrant disregard for the rights of women through improper online speech and expression.

They are violations of fundamental human rights, such as the right to equality outlined in Article 14 of the Indian Constitution and the right to live in dignity outlined in Article 21. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court ignored the way, being persecuted in cyberspace as a result of the abuse of this right when it rendered its decision in the landmark case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India about the legality of Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000. Because of how different electronic media is from print media in terms of its nature, such victimization would be perilous for women.

What Is Cyberspace?

Before delving deeper into the subject, a quick explanation of the basic terms that will be used frequently, such as "cyberspace," is provided. The setting where online communication occurs is referred to as "cyberspace." In other words, it's a world that the internet has built.

A global domain inside the information environment made up of an interconnected network of information technology infrastructures, such as the Internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers, is referred to as "cyberspace."

The virtual environment in which the electronic data of worldwide PCs circulate" is another definition. This is a generalized description of the internet. Cyberspace's primary trait is that it is made up of several computer networks, switches, routers, servers, etc. It is a collection of different infrastructures, including those for public health, banking, and the transportation and financial sectors.

Physical Stalking V. Cyber Stalking

Understanding what physical stalking entails is necessary before discussing the differences between physical and cyberstalking. Physical stalking entails behaviors meant to torment the victim, including threats.

In some ways, cyberstalking is essentially a development of traditional stalking, with the perpetrator using high-tech methods to carry out the crime (Petherick 2007). Cyberstalking is an increasing criminal concern in modern society, so it is important to look more closely at the offender's actions and behaviors (Desai & Jaishankar 2007). One of the first scholars to examine the frequency and effects of cyberstalking was Bocij (2005).

Geographically speaking, the victim and the stalker are close. It is challenging for a stalker to provoke another person to harass or threaten the victim. A physical altercation is required. In contrast to physical stalking, there is a possibility that the victim and the stalker may not reside in the same area. To provoke a third party to harass or threaten the victim is a very simple undertaking for a stalker.

It is not essential to engage in physical conflict to fulfill the intended goal. Physical stalking activities are very predictable in that the offender frequently follows the victim to their homes, places of employment, or even to school. As a result, it is rather simple for investigators to locate, catch, and then arrest the offender. Additionally, many stalkers turn to leave unwanted written messages at the victim's home or place of employment, and in some cases, they will make threatening phone calls to the victim to instill fear and intimidation.

All of these tactics can frequently be used to identify the offender with relative ease (Reno 1999). As previously indicated, the aforementioned offenses often leave behind a physical trail of evidence that will surely be used to build a criminal case against the perpetrator.

The very high likelihood that both offender types had a past intimate relationship, whether actual or perceived, with the victim, is another interesting contrast between the stalker and the cyberstalkers; yet, the cyberstalkers is more likely to pick their victims at random (Bocij & McFarlane 2003; Reno 1999). Nearly 50% of all cyberstalking occurrences, according to Reno (1999), involved strangers who were first approached in a seemingly innocent way online. Cyberstalkers can easily obtain a great amount of personal information thanks to the Internet (Reno 1999).

Numerous brokerage websites that target people merely looking for friends or family might provide easy access to information that was once regarded as private and sensitive a few decades ago (Reno 1999). Some of these websites are free, but the majority will request a user's name, phone number, address, social security number, date of birth, and other private identifying information in exchange for a nominal service fee (Reno 1999).

The majority of these brokerage websites were created to assist people in reconnecting with old friends and loved ones, but like anything else, they are vulnerable to misuse by those who wish to take advantage of them.

The aforementioned distinctions have led some criminologists to advise against finding a way to stop cyberstalking. Regulations can be used to prove guilt and ultimately punish physical stalking, but a new mechanism must be developed to guard against cyberstalkers. The Actus Reus and Mens Rea components of crime should be covered by this new system. This new system must deal with addressing the challenges of crime identification, evidence gathering, and jurisdictional issues.[3]

Remedies Provide Under Law

In this section, the author will concentrate on the legal provisions that are specifically specified in the Indian Penal Code, of 1860 and the Information Technology Act, of 2000. There must be an explanation of how these statutes apply to cyberstalking and under which laws the criminal may be arrested. Lawmakers in India created laws that are gender discriminatory because they saw women as the weaker group in society and wanted to protect them.

There are no specific laws that address the problem of online stalking. However, the author has attempted to clarify a few sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Information Technology Act that are somehow related to this crime, and an explanation of the relationship between the laws and the offense has been provided.

Let's throw some light on what Indian law states concerning cyberstalking in detail:

1. Section 354D of IPC defines "stalking". It reads as follows:
   Any man who:
   
   1. follows a woman and contacts, or attempts to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman; monitors the use by a woman of the internet, email, or any other form of electronic communication commits the offense of stalking;.."[4]
      
      Following the Delhi gang rape case, the clause was added by the Criminal Amendment Act of 2013. This section examines both traditional stalking and online stalking. The provision specifies its purview in terms of behaviors that constitute "stalking" as a crime. The section makes it quite clear that anyone trying to keep tabs on a woman's online activities is engaging in stalking. As a result, the stalker will be charged with an offense under Section 354D of the Indian Penal Code if he engages in any of the behaviors listed in the section.
      
      This section has many flaws, including the fact that it exclusively acknowledges "women" as victims while ignoring the possibility of victims among men. According to the Section, anyone who attempts to watch how a woman uses the internet, email, or any other form of electronic communication is guilty of the crime of cyberstalking. We can tell that it only gives attention to ladies. It is therefore discriminatory against women. Second, the "means of monitoring" has not been brought up by lawmakers. It is possible for someone to act stalking even if they have no intention of doing so.
       
2. Obscenity is defined in Section 292 of the IPC. The act of sending vulgar or offensive content to a victim by email, text message, social networking site, or other means falls under the definition of cyberstalking. When a stalker sends obscene material online with the goal that the recipient would read, see, or hear the content of the message, he or she is in violation of Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code and is guilty of stalking.
    
3. Crimes of "criminal intimidation by anonymous communication" are covered in Section 507 of the IPC. According to this clause, it constitutes an offense when a stalker makes an effort to conceal his identity so that the victim is uninformed of the source of the threat. Thus, it ensures anonymity, which is a key component of cyberstalking. If the stalker makes an effort to hide their identity, they are in violation of this provision.
    
4. Section 509 of IPC relates to the modesty of women reads as follows: "Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman.—Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished..."[5]
   
   If a stalker's actions interfere with a woman's right to privacy by gestures, or words transmitted through e-mails, messages, or posts on social media, they may be charged under this clause. He will be charged with an offense under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code if he engages in any such actions.
   
   There are numerous problems with Section 509. Some of these include the fact that it is a gender-biased provision because it solely considers a woman's modesty and ignores the fact that cyberstalking is a crime that can affect both men and women and is therefore not only a crime against women.
   
   It is a requirement of this section that the gesture, sound, or words be said, heard, or seen, accordingly. Since words cannot be uttered, gestures cannot be seen, and sounds cannot be heard online, cyberstalkers can easily avoid punishment under this clause. Last but not least, conversations on the internet cannot be used to infer a person's intent to offend a woman's modesty.
    
5. The Indian Penal Code's Section 292 is mirrored in Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. This section deals with the dissemination of pornographic material in "electronic form." hence, this part on online stalking is covered. The stalker will be charged with an offense under Section 67 of the IT Act if he attempts to broadcast any lewd information about the victim in electronic forms, such as on social media, in an effort to intimidate the victim.
    
6. The Information Technology Act of 2000's Section 67A addresses one aspect of the crime of cyberstalking. As a result of the 2008 modification, this provision was added. It stipulates that a stalker will be found guilty of an offense under Section 67A of the IT Act and will be penalized appropriately if he seeks to disseminate any "sexually explicit" material in electronic forms, such as through emails, messages, or on social media. The Information Technology Act of 2000's Section 67A addresses one aspect of the crime of cyberstalking. As a result of the 2008 modification, this provision was added. It stipulates that a stalker will be charged with an offense under Section 67A of the IT Act if he seeks to disseminate any "sexually explicit" material in electronic forms, such as through emails, messaging, or social media.
    
7. Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code deal with "voyeurism." Section 66E reads as follows:
   "Whoever, intentionally or knowingly captures, publishes or transmits the image of a private area of any person without his or her consent, under circumstances violating the privacy of that person, shall be punished."[6]
    

Section 354C reads as follows:
"Any man who watches, or captures the image of a woman engaging in a private act in circumstances where she would usually have the expectation of not being observed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the behest of the perpetrator or disseminates such image shall be punished…"[7]

In order to do harm, the stalker might gain access to the victim's account by hacking and posting personal images of the victim on social networking sites. In the victim's mind, there is despair and a feeling of threat. Both of the aforementioned sections are intended to make it illegal to publish or take images of someone else's private acts without that person's permission. In contrast to Section 345C, which is somewhat biased towards women, Section 66E is more general because it refers to the victim as "any individual." In accordance with § 354C, the victim must be a "woman."

The act of voyeurism is covered by the Indian Penal Code Section 354C. Because the victim must be a "lady" to be attracted to this part, its scope is quite limited. However, unlike Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code, Section 66E of the Information Technology Act has a broader definition of voyeurism. The victim is referred to as "any individual" in Section 66E. Therefore, the victim does not have to be a "woman" to obtain justice under this clause. The Information Technology Act of 2000's Section 66E may be used by the victim if he is a man.

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Information Technology Act, 2000 do not specifically address the problem of cyber stalking and the threatening or defamatory messages made by the stalker while stalking the victim via texts, phone calls, e-mails, or by publishing blogs under the victim's identity.

Although some of the provisions of the aforementioned Acts, which are listed in the aforementioned chapters, may be used to penalize the perpetrator, no express provision specifically addresses this offense. Although it is quite simple to commit this crime, its consequences are very severe. Both the victim's physical and emotional health may be negatively impacted. The existing provisions' penalty must be enhanced while keeping the victim's welfare in mind. [8]

Landmarks Cases On Cyber-Stalking In India

1. Case of Manish Kathuria [9]
   The Delhi Police reported the first case of cyber stalking in India in 2003, and the Manish Kataria case:
   which entailed the stalking of Ritu Kohli-was the impetus behind a 2008 revision to the IT Act. In her complaint, Ms. Kohli claimed that someone had been exploiting her identity to engage in a vulgar online talk at a certain website. The woman allegedly received calls from various locations as a result of the man allegedly giving her phone number to other chat room users.
   
   Her personal life was negatively impacted by this, suffering great hardship, trauma, and harassment. Finally, as part of their investigation, authorities were able to track down Manish Kathuria after using the IP addresses he had used to commit the crime. Kathuria admitted to the crime and was detained. Under Section 509 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), a charge was filed for "outraging the modesty" of his victim.
   
   Since the IT Act had not yet become effective when the complaint was submitted, it was not used in this case. Due to this instance, Indian lawmakers were aware of the necessity for particular legislation to deal with online stalking. However, Section 66A wasn't introduced until 2008. Therefore, cases were reported in accordance with this provision until the Supreme Court of India declared it to be unconstitutional. It is important to note that a Section 509 analysis does not specifically identify cyberstalking. In these situations, it is still difficult to prove incidents of cyberstalking in accordance with the law.
    
2. Karan Girotra V. State [10]
   Shivani Saxena filed a police report alleging that while she had wed Ishan, their union fell apart after only a few days because Ishan was unable to carry it through. Following the completion of one year of their marriage, it was peacefully agreed that both of them would file a joint petition, on the basis of mutual consent, for the award of divorce. Thereafter, both parties would be free to remarry. While this was going on, Shivani met Karan Girotra through an online chat and accepted his marriage proposal. Shivani declined the same because she was still married.
   
   Karan once took her to a place, made her drunk by offering her beverages, and then sexually assaulted her on the pretense of getting her to his family members. In addition, Karan took lewd pictures of her and began requesting sexual favors from her under the threat of revealing the pictures. Many goods, including a Santro Car, were handed to Karan by the complainant's family as part of the Roka ritual. Finally, he told the complainant's mother that the engagement had been broken off. As a result of Shivani's complaint, a case was opened under Sections 328 and 376 of the IPC as well as Section 66-A of the IT Act.
    
3. Case of Yogesh Prabhu (First case of cyberstalking in Mumbai) [11]
   Despite the low conviction rate for cyberstalking after the IT Act's amendments took effect in 2008, the Mumbai cyber unit achieved the first-ever conviction under the IT Act in Maharashtra in July 2015. In 2009, the cell looked into the matter because of online stalking. Yogesh Prabhu was found guilty by a metropolitan magistrate court of stalking and emailing his coworker offensive photos. Under sections 66-E of the Information Technology Act of 2008 (punishment for violation of privacy) and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (word, gesture, or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman), the court sentenced him to three years in prison and fines of Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 5,000, respectively.
    

Addressing Cyber Stalking In India: Trials

There is no question that combating cybercrimes requires solid information and technological understanding from the time that evidence is gathered until it is acknowledged by the legal system.[12] Unfortunately, the nation does not currently have the best practices for investigating cybercrime.

Following are some of the challenges involving cyberstalking:

• Global Crime & Lack of jurisdiction:
  The jurisdiction to conduct an investigation is a significant problem because cyberstalking is a transnational offense. Every time a cybercrime is done, the server of the computer or other electronic device that was used to commit the crime may be outside the Indian subcontinent.
   
• Anonymity of Wrong-doer:
  One of the main characteristics of the internet is its capacity to maintain user anonymity, which is thought to be useful for the perpetrators since it allows them to maintain their identity while appearing to be unrevealed.
   
• Poor state of Investigation capabilities:
  India also has weak capacities for cybercrime investigation. The necessary infrastructure does not exist to address technological crime. As a result, the prosecution cannot gather sufficient evidence to support its case.
   
• Tampering of evidence:
  Electronic evidence is simple to alter due to cyberspace's high degree of connectivity. At the time of evidence collection and preservation, law enforcement authorities are not well-equipped to prevent such manipulation. [13]
   
• Enhanced Vulnerabilities on Electronic Media:
  Due to the fact that the internet has no physical limits, it has a larger audience and people sitting in various areas can watch the harassment, abuse, etc. Additionally, with the help of cutting-edge technology, the internet has the capacity to morph images, distorted voices, and other things that could lead to major social disorders. The Internet offers more opportunities to infringe Article 21's fundamental rights to life, liberty, and dignity.

Conclusion And Recommendations
It is very well mentioned that if you want to change the existing condition, you must get rid of the outdated model of handling the circumstance and create a new, effective model. The phrase "cyber stalking" is relatively new. Recently, it has drawn the attention of the judiciary and legislators.

As it becomes exceedingly difficult for enforcement agencies to handle such cases, there have been many instances where the necessity for strong legislation was felt. Cyberstalking is now recognized as a serious offense. The victim's emotional and physical health is significantly impacted. The author has made an effort to discuss the term "cyberstalking" in length, as well as its nature and extent, in this paper.

On the internet, cyberstalking is a serious kind of harassment. Additionally, the courts face a dilemma in determining the proper jurisdiction to deal with such an offense. Therefore, the IT Act needs to be reviewed in order to allow for the prosecution of cyberstalking cases, and the law enforcement apparatus needs to be better equipped to deal with such issues. In order to lessen the vulnerability of online users, the issues involving law and technology in dealing with such offenses must be appropriately addressed.

Some claim that it is a new type of stalking or an expanded form of cyberstalking, but it seems to be more than that. Its very nature is a new kind of criminality. We've seen that the stalker's goal is to bother and threaten the victim. Therefore, criminal conduct is involved. On this matter, several nations have laws. The instances cannot be handled effectively under any of the current provisions. There is no specific legislation on the subject in India.

Few recommendations are made for the betterment of the redressal system for Cyberstalking;

1. Strict laws at the national level; it is imperative to make the necessary changes to the current laws or to reinstate Section 66A of the IT Act with the necessary regulations in the absence of a specific provision to address instances of cyberstalking.
    
2. Interstate cooperation is required; the investigating agency is unable to finish its investigation because of the other state's grave lack of cooperation and coordination. A Cyber-Crime Inter-State Cooperation Cell may be established in this regard and attached to each cyber cell to provide exclusive information about such crimes.
    
3. Action at the personal level; it is necessary to take preventative measures, such as adequate security measures to ensure that personal information is not disclosed on the internet in inappropriate form, in order to protect oneself from such cyberspace exploitation. It shouldn't be too simple for criminals to guess passwords. Social media privacy settings make it easy to block annoying accounts. The same action must be taken to prevent pointless harassment.
    
4. Role of Internet Service Providers; The Internet Service Provider has taken a few measures to limit the stalker's harassing behaviour. Few services offer the option to report abuses. For instance, Facebook, which was already mentioned, has some privacy rules that allow us to prevent strangers from sending messages with offensive language and abusive behaviour. 25 Internet service providers exercise control by placing erroneous emails in the spam folder.

When it comes to locating the stalker, there is a requirement for cooperation between Internet service providers and law enforcement authorities.

If the crime of cyberstalking rises quickly, only time will tell how effective these measures are. However, in light of taking precautions, the requirement for legislative provisions cannot be disregarded. Effective legislative measures are necessary to combat such cybercrimes.

References

• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 Act No. 45 OF 1860 1* [6th October, 1860.]
• The Information Technology Act, 2000 [Act No. 21 of 2000]

Works Cited

1. Abhiraj Thakur, Cyberstalking: A Crime or A Tort, Jun. 21, 2016.
2. Radosevich, Thwarting The Stalker: Are Anti-Stalking Measures Keeping Pace With Today's Stalker? 2000 U. Ill. L. Rev. 1371 2000.
3. B. Spitzberg and G. Hoobler, Cyberstalking and the Technologies of Interpersonal Terrorism, 4(1) New Media & Society 71 (2002).
4. BH Spitzberg and WR Cupach, the State of the Art of Stalking: Taking Stock of the Emerging Literature, 12 Aggression And Violent Behaviour 64 (2007).
5. Michael L. Pittaro, Cyberstalking: An Analysis of Online Harassment And Intimidation, International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 2007.
6. Cyber Stalking and The Plight of Women in India — A Legal Perspective, 9 RMLNLUJ (2017) 175.
7. D. Halder and K. Jaishankar, Cyber Crimes against Women in India: Problems, Perspectives and Solutions, 3(1) TMC ACAD. J. 48, 55 (2008).
8. D. Lamplugh& P. Infield, Harmonising Anti-Stalking Laws, 34 Geo. Wash. Int'l L. Rev. 853 2002-2003.
9. David C. Potter, The Jake Baker Case: True Threats and New Technology, 79 B.U. L. Rev. 779 1999.
10. Divij Joshi, India's Criminal Law Amendment to include Cyberstalking, Harassment an,d Voyeurism, CIS, (2013).
11. Divij Joshi, The Criminal Law Amendment Bill 2013 — Penalising 'Peeping Toms' and Other Privacy Issues, CIS, (2016).
12. Dr. DebartiHalder, Creating Awareness of Online Victimization using Social Media: A Therapeutic Jurisprudential Approach, June 9, 2015.
13. Dr. DebratiHalder, Cyber Stalking Victimisation of Women: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Current Laws in India from Restorative Justice and Therapeutic Jurisprudential Perspectives, SSRN 103, 103-130 (2015).

End-Notes:

1. Leroy McFarlane & Paul Bocij, Cyberstalking: The Technology of Hate, 76 Police Journal 204 (2003).
2. DR. S.K. MOHAPATRA, Victimisation of Women Under Cyberspace in Indian Environment, in 2 (3(1)) International Journal Of Academic Research, 221 July-September, 2015
3. KW Seto, How Should Legislation Deal With Children as the Victims and Perpetrators of Cyberstalking?, 9 CARDOZO WOMEN‟S L. J. 67, 73-74 (2002).
4. Indian Penal Code, 1860, No.45, Acts of Parliament, 1860.
5. Indian Penal Code, 1860, No.45, Acts of Parliament, 1860.
6. Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21, Act of Parliament, 2000.
7. Indian Penal Code, 1860, No.45, Acts of Parliament, 1860.
8. Vijay Mukhi and Karan Gokani, Observations on the Proposed Amendments to the IT Act 2000.
9. Sandhya Soman, Cyberstalking Makes First Entry Into Legal Debate, available at http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JQ0gvMjAxMy8wMy8xOCNBcjAwNDAy (last visited Dec 22, 2022).
10. Sandhya Soman, Cyberstalking Makes First Entry Into Legal Debate, available at http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp? (last visited Dec 22, 2022).
11. See Cyber cell's first conviction: Man gets 3 years for sending obscene messages, stalking colleague, Indian Express, Jul. 4, 2015 available at http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/cyber-cells-first-conviction-man-gets-3-years-for-sending-obscene-messages-stalking-colleague/ (last visited Dec 23, 2022).
12. See Franklin Witter, Legal Aspects Of Collecting And Preserving Computer Forensic Evidence, available at http://www.giac.org/paper/gsec/636/legal-aspects-collecting-preserving-computer-forensic-evidence/101482 (last visited Dec 23, 2022).
13. See generally BILL NELSON, AMELIA PHILLIPS & CHRISTOPHER STEUART, Guide to Computer Forensics and Investigation 153 (2010)