Skip to content

CS Professional · Internal and Forensic Audit · Basic Concepts of Forensic Audit

A forensic auditor at Himalaya Pharma Ltd. copies the suspect's email files, but does not record who handled the copy, when, or how it was stored before analysis. Later, the defence challenges the evidence. What is the most likely consequence of this lapse?

The reliability and admissibility of the evidence may be challenged. Chain of custody documents who handled the evidence, when and how it was stored, proving it was not altered. Without that record, the defence can argue tampering, and the evidence may carry little weight in court.

  1. AThe evidence becomes stronger because it was copied early
  2. BThe evidence is automatically valid because the company owns the email system
  3. CNothing changes, since forensic evidence is judged only on its content
  4. DThe reliability and admissibility of the evidence may be questioned because the chain of custody is brokenCorrect

Explanation

A documented chain of custody shows that evidence was preserved and not altered. Without it, the opposing side can argue tampering, weakening reliability and admissibility. Ownership of the system does not remove the need to prove integrity of the copy.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Basic Concepts of Forensic Audit shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Basic Concepts of Forensic AuditFree diagnostic mock

More Basic Concepts of Forensic Audit questions