The Trojan horse defence is an important aspect of the investigation of crimes involving digital evidence. In raising this defence, the accused claims that they are not responsible for some or all of the digital evidence that forms the offence, but by someone else who has abused their computer system with a Trojan horse or other malicious code. The prosecution must refute such claims with certainty, otherwise the court (or the jury) will have to find the defendant innocent of the crime.To avoid the Trojan horse defence, law enforcement agents will also, in addition to presenting digital evidence (which must not only prove the existence of a crime, but also the absence of malicious codes and other offenders who could be involved in the offence), use traditional forms of evidence, such as physical evidence, witnesses, motive, and the computer knowledge of the accused. The stronger the connection between digital and other forms of evidence, the lower the probability of using a Trojan horse defence as a diversion with the intent to confuse the court and the jury.The article presents theoretical and practical dilemmas of a Trojan horse defence, offering some solutions for law enforcement agents when dealing with such a defence within the context of Slovenian criminal law.

Whistleblowers, and their cooperation with journalists, constitute a key element in preventing wrongdoings and protecting public interests. This contribution examines how they are protected in the recent Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the Protection of Persons Reporting on Breaches of Union Law. It highlights that the final wording of the Directive still raises a number of potential concerns. The legislative process behind the Directive is outlined, illustrating the lack of consensus between the European Parliament and the Council during its drafting procedure. It is furthermore explained how the Directive aims to protect individuals from suffering retaliation in cases where they report violations of EU law. Finally, common criticisms regarding certain solutions such as the sectoral and tiered approach are addressed. These issues will have an effect on the whistleblowers’ motivation in raising the alarm, thereby diminishing their role as a journalist source.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract