Investigation and evidence
How technical findings are recorded in a verifiable way.
Terms
This category covers the terms around investigation and evidence: the expert report, the role of the expert witness, the counter expertise, the evidential value of a finding and the position of the independent expert. Together they describe how a technical finding becomes usable in a legal procedure.
Below we explain the terms around investigation and evidence. We work from the technical side and thereby support lawyers and legal professionals; the legal assessment remains with them. If you have questions, we are glad to think along with you.
These terms become relevant as soon as a file reaches a court, a lawyer or an insurer. What counts then is not only what was found, but whether the reasoning was recorded in a verifiable way and whether someone else could reach the same outcome. Knowing the terms tells you which questions an opposing party will ask and what substantiation has to stand against them. The explanations below help with that preparation and do not replace legal advice.
What investigation and evidence demand of each other
Investigation and evidence are not the same activity, and treating them as one is the most common mistake in this field. An investigation may follow a hunch, test it, discard it and start again. Evidence has to survive being read by someone who was not there, who has no reason to trust you and who will look first for the step that does not follow. Everything in this category exists to bridge that gap: a finding is only worth what can still be checked once you have left the room.
In practice that means three habits. Record the raw material before you interpret it, so amounts, timestamps and transaction references stand on their own. Separate what the data shows from what you conclude from it, in words rather than by implication. And state the limits, including the routes you could not follow and the attributions you could not confirm. A report that admits an open question is stronger than one that quietly closes it, because the reader can see where to look for more.
What makes crypto unusual is that much of the underlying record is public and permanent, so a third party can repeat your steps years later. That is an advantage for investigation and evidence alike, but it cuts both ways: an error you made is just as reproducible as a finding you got right. It is the reason our reports name the method and the moment of observation, not only the outcome.
Practically, that shapes how we hand something over. The report states the observation, the source and the date, and keeps the reasoning in a separate paragraph that a reader can disagree with without discarding the facts. If an institution later wants to verify a single line, it can do so from the public record and its own systems, without needing us again.
Frequently asked questions about evidence and proof
Around crypto investigation and evidence, many questions concern what a report is worth and how it comes about. The terms above describe the separate parts; below you see how they fit together.
What makes an investigation report traceable?
A traceable report shows which steps were taken and which sources were used, so that someone else can follow the reasoning. Paucitas delivers the report in that form, so it can support a police report or proceedings.
Can a Paucitas report serve as evidence?
A report maps the facts in a traceable way. Whether it is accepted as evidence in proceedings is ultimately decided by the authority or court reviewing it. This is not legal advice.
How do I start if I want to gather evidence?
Record what you have: transaction data, wallets, messages and timestamps. The more complete the starting material, the further an investigation can go.
Short answers to specific questions
One short page per question, with the answer in the first two sentences.
Background reading from the blog
Longer pieces on the same subject, with cases and practical steps.
- How to secure evidence after crypto theft (do’s and don’ts)
- May a crypto report serve as evidence in a Dutch court case?
- Case study: a crypto counter-expertise that undermined a report
- Requesting a second opinion on a crypto report: how it works
- Acting as an independent expert: the role of Paucitas in legal proceedings
- Frequently asked questions about legal crypto matters
- When do you engage a crypto expert? A decision tree
- Crypto in a divorce: mapping and dividing assets
- Crypto in bankruptcy: tracing and mapping assets
- Gifting or inheriting crypto: recording origin and valuation correctly
See also the overview of topics and pillars and the overview of questions.
Your own situation
If you are reading this, you probably have a question about your own situation. That is exactly what Paucitas does.
The first step is contact by phone. We prefer to schedule that call through WhatsApp, so you do not have to wait. In the call we look together at what can factually be established in your case and what Paucitas can examine for you.