Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Tampering with evidence, or evidence tampering, is an act in which a person alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys evidence with the intent to interfere with an investigation (usually) by a law-enforcement, governmental, or regulatory authority. [1] It is a criminal offense in many jurisdictions. [2]
Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors, there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors' institution will not investigate the case, they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the ...
Acts that conceal, corrupt, or destroy evidence can be considered spoliation of evidence and/or tampering with evidence. Spoliation is usually the civil-law/due-process variant, may involve intent or negligence, may affect the outcome of a case in which the evidence is material, and may or may not result in criminal prosecution.
Tampering with evidence carries a punishment up to 10 years in prison. ... State law doesn't have an accomplice-after-the-fact liability for murder. But the law has tampering with evidence as the ...
Articles relating to tampering with evidence, an act in which a person alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys evidence with the intent to interfere with an investigation (usually) by a law-enforcement, governmental, or regulatory authority.
An ongoing state police investigation into alleged tampering during the widely watched double murder trial has already found unspecified “significant factual disputes” with the claims made last w
Joachim Boldt (Germany), an anesthesiologist formerly based at the Justus Liebig University Giessen, was stripped of his professorship and criminally investigated for forgery in his research studies. [17] As of 2024, Boldt has had 220 of his research publications retracted, and 10 others have received an expression of concern. [18] [19]
Tampering with digital watermarks, which flag to consumers when images are AI-generated, remains too easy for authorities to devise guidance for industry, she said.