tampering of evidences. The goal of these instruments is to ensure digital evidence remains admissible in court and supports effective and fair investigations. Considering the above international standards, we can observe that preceding the investigation and examination of electronic evidence, there's a method called 'forensic triage' gaining attention in forensic and law enforcement circles. It encompasses various processes, tools, and methodologies aimed at prioritizing digital forensic investigations more effectively. However, it's important to note that forensic triage isn't suitable for every case and should be used alongside proper risk assessment by trained individuals. When employing digital triage techniques, it is important to balance rapid identification of material of interest with the risk of stopping further analysis, potentially missing exculpatory or more significant material. For example, in a case involving the downloading of indecent images and child abuse, keyword and hash set analysis can quickly identify known indecent images. However, relying solely on triage results may lead to overlooking more serious offenses. Therefore, digital triage should be seen as an early investigation technique aiding informed decisions rather than the sole investigative method. 2.1 Handling Electronic Devices Digital evidence professionals are advised to uphold high standards in collecting and handling digital evidence, regardless of whether they're involved in criminal or civil cases. Improper handling of digital data can lead to challenges regarding the destruction of data and the employment of inadequate practices10. Following Association of Chief Police Officers Guidelines (ACPO guidelines)11 is crucial to ensure proper handling of electronic evidence, considering its volatile and easily alterable nature. The principles stress the importance of preserving data integrity, competence in accessing original data, 10 11 Stanford International Bank Limited (in liquidation) v. Hamilton-Smith, High Court (Antigua), See : https://ag.vlex.com/vid/alexander-m-fundora-applicant-805812073 Williams, Janet. "Acpo good practice guide for digital evidence." Metropolitan Police Service, Association of chief police officers, GB (2012): 1556-6013., Good Practice Guides for Digital Evidence (the latest of five revisions coming in 2012, the first being in 1998 [2]) are considered to provide core information for practitioners operating in the digital forensics field in England and Wales. The,Principle 1, No action taken by law enforcement agencies, persons employed within those agencies or their agents should change data which may subsequently be relied upon in court. Principle 2, In circumstances where a person finds it necessary to access original data, that person must be competent to do so and be able to give evidence explaining the relevance and the implications of their actions. Principle 3, An audit trail or other record of all processes applied to digital evidence should be created and preserved. An independent third party should be able to examine those processes and achieve the same result, Principle 4: The person in charge of the investigation has overall responsibility for ensuring that the law and these principles are adhered to. 9