Colorado district attorneys, public defenders sound alarm over massive volume of digital evidence

As law enforcement agencies have become increasingly high-tech, the amount of digital evidence in criminal cases has exploded. In some cases, investigators have access to hundreds of hours of body camera video on top of cell phone extractions, 3-D crime scene scans and digitized interviews. They also have a case management system unequipped to handle the size and complexity of the data.

The overwhelming amount of digital evidence that both district attorneys and public defenders in Colorado must manage is so dire that state lawmakers created a task force to address the issue, which effects every criminal case in the state.

"The impact, I want to be clear, is a threat to the administration of justice," said James Karbach, director of Legislative Policy and External Communications at the Colorado State Public Defender.

Karbach and Tom Raynes, executive director of the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, chair the task force.

"There's plenty for us to fight about on a daily basis, but, obtaining equitable and thorough access to necessary discovery for the lawyers, for the victims, for the defendants, we are on the same page on that," Raynes said. 

By law, prosecutors have 21 days after a defendant's first appearance to share evidence with the defense or they face sanctions. But many law enforcement agencies in Colorado have now hired third party vendors to manage their digital evidence, and attorneys who want to view the evidence often need to shell out thousands of dollars for each vendor's software license.

"You get a link. You click it, and it will download a big chunk of discovery," Karbach said. "The file titles might just show up in gibberish, code. And, if a new link comes out, if they add a video, we may have downloaded 30 videos. If they add a thirty-first, often, these links are reproduced, and you have to download all 30 all over again to get the thirty-first." 

Karbach says that can take hours or even days in some cases.

"One would think that, with all this incredible technology, all of this would happen more quickly and more efficiently," Raynes said. "When, in actually, it's made it more difficult."

Karbach says the solution is elusive and expensive. 

"The starting point of evaluating your case is knowing the facts," Karbach said. "And, if you can't know the facts because you don't have the information, lots of things go by the wayside, including fairness and truth."

The eDiscovery Task Force released a report recommending the state upgrade its current system for managing evidence and integrate it with top vendor systems. It also says the state should require all contracts with vendors include provisions that ensure attorneys can access the data, and that there is uniform pricing across the state for the software.

While many metro area district attorneys have been able to buy the software licenses, rural district attorneys don't have the means. The cost of storing the digital evidence in the cloud is also expensive.

Raynes and Karbach say the state will ultimately need to invest significant funds to address the issue