Articles Posted in Expert Witness News

In Security Experts: Litigation and Beyond, security expert witness Robert A. Gardner, CPP, writes:

Q. How can a security expert help me? I don’t handle security related litigation.

A. It’s true that security experts are most often retained for litigation. Expert opinions on issues of crime foreseeability, security adequacy, and security standards and practices can make or break a case. As such both plaintiff and defense attorneys are constantly in search of qualified security experts. But while the attorney who prevails for a client in litigation may be appreciated, the attorney that can keep a client out of litigation is a true hero.

Document examination expert witness Ronald N. Morris is a certified forensic document examiner and in this excerpt from Submitting a Handwriting Case for Examination, he writes on working with copies:

Another reason why photocopies are problematic is the ability of a person to create or fabricate a completely fictitious document using photocopy technology. The purpose of fabricated documents is to offer them as proof of a position in a dispute, to justify a position, or taking some action. Increasingly, the authenticity of photocopied documents is being questioned because of the ease with which fictitious documents can be created to make it appear that the original document contained certain text or even a signature.

Assuming that the copy accurately records all of the features found on the original it purports to represent is hazardous at best. The only way to substantiate that a copy is an accurate reproduction of the document it purports to represent is by comparing the copy with the original. Authentication of an original based only on the examination of a purported copy of that document is not possible. Any opinion based on the examination of a copy applies only to the examined copy and cannot be extrapolated to the original the copy purports to represent.

In Managing the Risky Business of Company E-mail Part1 internet expert witness Scott Greene writes that his company has documented, during the examination of electronic systems, employees who frequently say/save things into e-mails or store on a computer, things they would never say anywhere else.

Either having an employee delete a potentially damaging or inflammatory e-mail or even an employee deleting an e-mail on their own, does not protect anyone. In fact, it could in the end harm everyone involved.

If a complaint or inappropriate conduct of an employee has risen to the level where you as an owner/supervisor, need to consult a Computer and Technology Forensics expert, one of the first areas checked is for deleted documents and/or e-mails. These items cause red flags during an examination of equipment, and the original items can and most likely will be found and/or reconstructed. It is very important to understand that the intentional destruction of evidence is a felony, and if proven, could land one in jail.

In Continental Valuations News, real estate valuation expert witness Robert D. Domini, MBA, MAI, writes:

Not only is there a natural fallout from an auto recession, but this time around the domestic auto companies have run out of money, although Ford has survived so far without Government funds. GM and Chrysler are being forced to close dealerships. GM is shedding divisions as we speak.

Commercial real estate owners are facing a double whammy. They are not only fighting higher vacancy, lower rents and higher cap rates, but they are also facing restricted debt options. As the economy continues to shed jobs at a rate of 650,000 to 700,000 per month, investors will face ever greater challenges. According to Deutsche Bank, the conduit lenders are facing 3.5% delinquency and expect the figure to reach 6% by the end of the year. The peak rate during the early 90s was in the 6% to 7% range. So, with 5-year rollovers coming due, investors face much tighter underwriting standards amidst declining prices, cash flow, rents, etc.

In Managing the Risky Business of Company E-mail Part1 internet expert witness Scott Greene, CEO of Evidence Solutions, Inc., writes:

As an employer, Human Resources Director, or Risk Management Supervisor, ask yourself this question: “Do our employees think about the legal risk of sending communications over the internet?” If you are like the majority of companies, your answer would be, “It is highly improbable”. It is a very common problem amid the work place, for an employee to believe their electronic communications are transient, temporary and, once deleted, untraceable and therefore, harmless.

The fact is e-mail, faxes and even cellular phones leave a trace. Just one e-mail sent from your employee to the employee of a different company passes through an average of four different computer systems. This creates a trail making e-mail real, traceable, and permanent.

Document examination expert witness Ronald N. Morris is a certified forensic document examiner and in this excerpt from Submitting a Handwriting Case for Examination, he writes on working with copies:

The best evidence for examination purposes is always the original document, but frequently only a photocopy is available. If it is necessary to examine a photocopy, the best copy for examination purposes is one made from the original document and not a copy of a copy.

Photocopies typically do not reveal all the evidence found on the original document or document being copied, i.e., significant quality and features of the writing, indentations, outlines, feather strokes, pen stops, alterations, etc. A photocopy can also contain artifacts not on the original. These artifacts may be dirt, dried white-out, or scratches on the glass. There may also be defects on the machine’s drum, or some other cause.

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Fourth, the MOI should stand on its own for judgment. Some inventors include a section on the planned experiments to help define the invention. This often leads to the memo receiving a low rating and held for the next patent committee meeting. The MOI should be written when there is sufficient data or the concept is sufficiently complete for an evaluation.

At most companies, a highly rated MOI has been carefully “lobbied” by the inventor.

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Now, a few things that should not be in the MOI.

First, the potential inventor should not express legal opinions concerning the potential invention. Attorneys are superb at sternly warning that such opinions can come back to haunt the inventor at a deposition or, more traumatically, on the witness stand.

Document examination expert witness Ronald N. Morris is a certified forensic document examiner and in this excerpt from Submitting a Handwriting Case for Examination, he answers the question:

What is known, sample, or specimen writing?

Regardless of what it is called, this is the known and verifiable writing of an individual that is to be compared to the questioned writing to try and determine whether the writer of the known wrote the questioned writing. Known writing falls into one of the following categories:

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Third, the MOI should include a reasonable summary of the prior art. This gives the reviewers a warm feeling that the writer of the memo has some reasonable appreciation concerning the novelty of the invention. In many cases, the inventor knows the prior art quite well. Some arguments why the MOI isn’t obvious in light of the prior art can be very helpful to a patent committee.

Fourth, the memo should have the correct administrative details such as references to lab books and the names of the inventors. Including a colleague who did not contribute to the invention raises a flag indicating possible future problems and undermines the credibility of the MOI as a legal document. An easy reason to lower the priority; someone will need to straighten out the inventors.