The Role of Computer Technologies in Structuring Evidence Gathering in Cybercrime Investigations: A Qualitative Analysis

• Published date: 01 March 2025
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/07340168231161091
• Author: Kevin F. Steinmetz,Brian P. Schaefer,Christopher G. Brewer,Don L. Kurtz
• Date: 01 March 2025
• Subject Matter: Original Articles

The Role of Computer

Technologies in Structuring

Evidence Gathering in

Cybercrime Investigations:

A Qualitative Analysis

Kevin F. Steinmetz

1

, Brian P. Schaefer

2

,

Christopher G. Brewer

3

, and Don L. Kurtz

1

Abstract

In recent decades, law enforcement agencies have increasingly prioritized cybercrime investigations,

as evinced by the growing adoption of specialized cybercrime units and personnel. A burgeoning

literature has emerged which examines cybercrime units and investigators. Yet, little attention

has been given to the role of computers in shaping these investigations. This study addresses this

gap through an analysis of qualitative interviews with 47 cybercrime investigative personnel includ-

ing sworn detectives, civilian analysts, and unit administrators. This analysis conf‌irms and extends

prior research by exploring challenges presented by computers to cybercrime investigations includ-

ing issues surrounding anonymization, en cryption, jurisdiction, caseloads, backlogs, data volume,

eliciting data from electronic service providers, and the ever-changing technological landscape.

Also considered are the advantages offered by such technologies for cybercrime investigations.

Computer and network technologies facilitate undercover investigations, provide easy access to

global networks and databases, and supply large quantities of evidence to help secure convictions.

Finally, this study considers elements of cybercrime investigations not supplanted by computer data-

bases, automation, or network systems. Directions for future research and policy implications are

considered.

Keywords

police, cybercrime investigations, computers and policing, specialized investigative units, qualitative

methods, interviews

1

Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA

2

Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA

3

Department of Criminal Justice Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA

Corresponding Author:

Kevin F. Steinmetz, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Kansas State University, Manhattan,KS, USA.

Email: kfsteinmetz@ksu.edu

Original Article

Criminal Justice Review

2025, Vol. 50(1) 67-84

© 2023 Georgia State University

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/07340168231161091

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjr

In 1967, Lyndon Johnson’s Crime Commission (the “Katzenbach Commission”) published a land-

mark report on the state of crime and criminal justice in the United States. As part of their analysis,

the Commission studied the role of science and technology in American criminal justice operations

and noted that “the scientif‌ic and technological revolution that has so radically changed most of

American society during the past few decades has had surprisingly little impact upon the cri minal

justice system”(Katzenbach Commission, 1967, p. 245). Among other things, the Commission rec-

ommended the steady adoption of computer technologies by police departments to improve police

operations and administration.

Since the Katzenbach Commission, computers have become pervasive throughout American

policing. Mobile digital computer systems, smartphones, digital databases, predictive statistical

analysis technologies, and similar technologies have proliferated (Brayne, 2021; Manning,

1992a, 1996, 2003, 2008). A robust body of scholarship has emerged which examines the rela-

tionships between these technologies, police operations, and administration (e.g., Brayne, 2021;

Chan, 2001; Manning, 1992a; Sandhu & Fussey, 2021). Though illuminating, this prior research

has overlooked an area of policing perhaps most fundamentally structured by computer technol-

ogies: cybercrime investigations—a growing priority for law enforcement agencies across the

U.S. For cybercrime investigators, computers mediate much of the investigative process and

serve as primary sources of criminal evidence. Cybercrime investigations also often require

unique computer-related knowledge and skills. Yet, despite the centrality of computers to

their charge, most studies have done little to examine the relationship between computers and

these investigations beyond the challenges such technologies present to investigators or descrip-

tions of digital forensics tools and techniques (Holt et al., 2018).

Some argue that policing is a craft—a form of skilled labor (Chatterton, 1995; Willis &

Mastrofski, 2017, 2018). If true, then it is vital to understand the role of technologies in

police labor processes and practices. Scholars have long noted that machinery can shape and

reconf‌igure the relations between and among workers, their tools, their administrative

systems, and selves (e.g., Sennett, 2008; Zuboff, 1988). This is especially true of computers

which can signif‌icantly shift work from tactile, physical processes to mediated abstractions by

“informating”labor processes (Zuboff, 1988). Such technologies may present new challenges

or, conversely, advantages for worker. In addition, not all elements of the labor process are

equally affected—some elements of labor may be left relatively unaltered while other points

may be fundamentally transformed.

To this end, this study examines qualitative interviews with 47 cybercrime investigative person-

nel, including sworn detectives, civilian analysts, and unit administrators. Like prior studies, this

analysis considers the challenges computer technologies present to cybercrime investigations (e.g.,

Boes & Leukfeldt, 2016; Broadhurst, 2006; Cross, 2020). In short, computers have the capacity to

anonymize offenders, obstruct evidence gathering, and permit crime at-a-distance. Further, investi-

gators reported that they may struggle to gather evidence from electronic service providers, cope with

an inf‌lux of cases and data, and manage a constantly changing technological landscape. Rather than

simply provide an inventory of challenges described by participants, this study also considers the

advantages offered by computer technologies to cybercrime investigators which include enabling

and simplifying undercover operations, giving investigators access to digitized sources of informa-

tion, allowing the remote identif‌ication of suspects, and making available evidence in such quantities

that cases can be easily closed and prosecuted. Finally, this study considers elements of the cyber-

crime investigative process that remain relatively analog despite the centrality of computers to

such investigations. Before describing the results of this study, prior research on the relationship

between policing and computers is reviewed followed by the methodological approach utilized in

this analysis.

68 Criminal Justice Review 50(1)