Instructions:Please complete the discussion below one full page of content. All work needs to be cited in APA, and be original. I have attached reference material to this order. Please answer each question on a separate page, and place references on a separate page as well. Please make sure all work is original. I cant afford to have my assignments flagged by my instructor. For discussion #2 you can use whichever reference material to answer the question. But make sure that sources are credible. ALL QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ANSWERED IN A SEPARATE PAGE. TRY TO USE AT LEAST 2-3 REFERENCES TO ANSWER EACH QUESTIONDISCUSSION# 1WEEK#1A business is supposed to preserve all relevant data to a particular piece of litigation as soon as that litigation is “reasonably anticipated.” If a client of yours is having trouble forcing another party to a contract to complete its work, please illustrate what indicators you would look to determine if litigation is reasonably anticipated.One suggestion is to define what it means when we state “reasonably anticipated” and build upon that premise. Also, consider what preservation requests one might propose and why. In other words, what data (files, hard copies) or devices could fall within the scope of the matter and preservation request? Leverage both your textbook and the Sedona Conference material. Note: We will cover the Sedona Conference principles in the the next one to two weeks, however it is recommended that you familiarize yourself with the material for this assignment.Suggested Reading: Reference Material is attached to order• Preservation of Electronically Stored Information • The Duty to Preserve Evidence • “The Perfect Preservation Letter” by Craig Ball DISCUSSION QUESTION#2 WEEK#1PI LicensureYour manager has assigned you to a team to comment on new legislation in your state regarding licensing of people performing computer (digital) forensics as private investigators.• Please list one reason in favor of that legislative approach and one against.• Support your points with evidence and don’t repeat any other person’s points.DISCUSSION# 3WEEK#2Discovery in the US and in EUFor this week’s discussion, compare eDiscovery in the US and in EU member countries (France, Germany, UK, etc.). Consider the general scope of eDiscovery and country-specific restrictions on the scope of eDiscovery. Please keep in mind, that the previous EU Safe Harbor provision was recently invalidated. This may help aid your discussion.Also, compare eDiscovery in the US and Canada. The province of Ontario in Canada recently released updated Civil Rules of Procedure (as of January 2010) and they provide an interesting comparison to the US Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.Lastly, if there are any issues you want to discuss from last week, feel free to do so! DISCUSSION#4WEEK#3 Expert TestimonyAs a learning tool, watching an expert give testimony in court is a great resource. With the ever-growing popularity of court cases, the media has allowed us to review many cases via the Internet, specifically video sharing websites.Please review these videos and provide a critique of the experts testimony. http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9493845/#/vid9493845 (Links to an external site.) – Expert lays out his expertise (You don’t need to watch the entire video, but get a sense of how this witness describes his expertise) http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9494335/#/vid9494335 (Links to an external site.) – Testimony portion (Watch the entire video and provide your critique) Not required, but this is a short (12 minute) video of another expert in the Bradley Cooper trial – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKIi3AV5TKM (Links to an external site.)Please be sure to reference specific times and lines of questioning when stating your opinion.
