Lack of Communication

The subject avoids or delays engagement with the investigation by failing to respond to formal communication attempts. This anti-forensic behavior manifests as ignored meeting requests, prolonged email silence, delayed replies to HR or Legal correspondence, or refusal to engage in scheduled discussions. In more sophisticated cases, the subject may cite external justifications, such as stress, workload, or active legal consultation, to defer interaction without outright refusal.

These behaviors often emerge once the subject becomes aware of investigative scrutiny or anticipates disciplinary action. While not overtly obstructive in isolation, the cumulative impact of sustained communication avoidance can materially hinder the investigation’s pace and prevent timely evidence preservation, containment, or escalation.

This tactic is particularly effective in organizations where procedural deference, wellness accommodations, or interdepartmental dependencies limit the ability to enforce timely cooperation. Investigators should treat communication silence, especially when it follows a triggering event, as a potential indicator of an anti-forensic strategy and escalate accordingly.