During contentious divorce proceedings in Oregon, a no-contact restraining order was in place. The client’s carrier call detail records (CDRs) showed a call placed to the protected party’s number. The district attorney filed criminal contempt of court charges — a conviction that would have meant potential jail time and severely compromised the client’s position in custody proceedings.
The client told defense counsel the call was an accidental pocket dial — the phone was in a bag and the screen was pressed inadvertently. But “it was an accident” is not a legal defense without evidence. The carrier’s records showed the call happened. Intent was the only question, and the burden was on the defense to demonstrate it.
Defense counsel retained Cascadia AI Forensics to examine the mobile device and determine whether the forensic evidence supported or refuted the client’s account of an accidental dial.
Created a bit-for-bit forensic image of the client’s mobile device using write-blocking methodology. The original device was never modified — all analysis was performed against a verified copy, preserving the chain of custody for courtroom admissibility.
Extracted the device’s native call history database from the forensic image. Mobile operating systems store call records with far greater precision than carrier CDRs — including sub-second duration fields that carriers typically discard or round.
The device-level call record for the disputed call showed a duration of 0.2 milliseconds. That is two-tenths of one-thousandth of a second — faster than a human blink (300–400 ms), faster than a single heartbeat (800 ms), and orders of magnitude shorter than even the fastest deliberate dial-and-hang-up action.
Prepared a forensic examination report and expert declaration explaining the technical significance of the 0.2 ms duration: the call was initiated and terminated by the device before a voice channel could be established — consistent with incidental screen contact or proximity-sensor triggering, not a deliberate action.
Carrier CDRs reported the call as “0 seconds” — ambiguous enough for the prosecution to argue a brief intentional contact. The device’s own call database told a different story entirely.
The device’s call log recorded a duration of 0.2 milliseconds — below the threshold for a voice channel to be established, let alone for any human speech or deliberate action to occur.
The carrier CDR rounded the call to “0 seconds” — ambiguous. The device-level database retained sub-millisecond precision that the carrier records discarded, providing the specificity needed to resolve the question of intent.
At 0.2 ms, the call was initiated and terminated by the device before a cellular voice channel could complete its setup handshake. No audio was transmitted. No conversation could have occurred.
The duration profile is consistent with an accidental screen touch or proximity-sensor activation — the device registered a dial attempt and immediately cancelled it. This is a well-documented behavior in mobile forensics literature.
Every step was performed against a write-blocked forensic image with documented chain of custody. The analysis was fully reproducible and admissible under Oregon’s evidentiary standards.
Presented with the forensic evidence, the district attorney conceded the call was accidental. The criminal contempt charge was dismissed, and the restraining order was subsequently lifted.
A complete forensic package that answered the single question at the heart of the case — and made the answer self-evident to a non-technical audience.
“Without the device forensics, we had a call record and a client saying it was an accident. With the forensics, we had a number the DA couldn’t argue with. Two-tenths of a millisecond. The case was over before we got to the courtroom.”
Mobile forensics can surface evidence that carrier records and witness testimony cannot. Initial consultations are confidential and assess whether your matter is a good fit for forensic analysis.
Book a Consultation