Accident investigation expert witness Steven Barsky is Principal of Marine Marketing and Consulting, a consulting business for the diving and marine-related industries. In Analysis of a Diving Accident: Death of a Diver, the expert witness writes on lessons to be learned for diving companies:

During his deposition, the head of the diving company admitted that although his company was a member of the ADCI, he had only joined the association to obtain the insurance and believed that Consensus Standards were not something that applied to his operations. Unfortunately, he learned that these are the standards your company will be held to as a commercial diving contractor.

Never modify diving equipment that you have purchased from a manufacturer. Once a piece of gear is modified, the liability for that equipment becomes your responsibility. If you think there is a problem with a piece of gear and it needs modification, consult the manufacturer and get their response in writing before making any changes.

In Fire Experts and the Fire Code, fire expert witness Robert Rowe, Pyrocop, Inc., writes:

Fire codes are written by dedicated and knowledgeable fire experts who have, at one time or another during their fire service career have witnessed serious injury or the loss of life and property. So why does the U.S., the most powerful and technologically advanced nation in the world, still experience fire injuries, fire fatalities and pay out billions of dollars in insurance claims each year?

According to the 2007 fire statistics published by the National Fire Protection Association, U.S. fire departments responded to an estimated 1,557,500 fires. These fires resulted in 3,430 civilian fire fatalities, 17,675 civilian fire injuries and an estimated $14,639,000,000 in direct property loss. A civilian fire death occurred every 153 minutes and a civilian fire injury every 30 minutes. Home fires contributed 2,865, or 84%, of the civilian fire deaths.

Accident investigation expert witness Steven Barsky is Principal of Marine Marketing and Consulting, a consulting business for the diving and marine-related industries. In Analysis of a Diving Accident: Death of a Diver, the expert witness writes:

Nothing is more tragic than the death or serious injury of a diver, especially when the accident could have been easily prevented. In most diving accident cases where I have consulted, there are usually multiple mistakes made by both the diver and the dive team…

There are two important lessons to be learned by divers… First, and foremost, if the company you are working for does not adhere to all aspects of the ADCI Consensus Standards, you need to tactfully point out any deficiencies in their work practices and strive to get them corrected. If the company blatantly disregards the ADCI Consensus Standards and refuses to revise their practices, then you need to look for another place to work. With the shortage of divers today, nobody should have to put up with a company that does not follow safe practices.

In Planning a Fire Investigation, fire expert witness and Principal of Pyrocop Inc., Robert Rowe writes:

Whether you are a seasoned fire expert or just getting into the business, the need to properly plan your fire investigation is critical to its outcome. As quoted by Benjamin Franklin, commonly referred to as the “father of the fire service”, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.”

As a Fire expert, one must always carefully consider their resources prior to the commencement of his or her investigation and plan accordingly. Factors effecting the planning of a fire investigation may include but are not limited to, the complexity of the fire, size of the fire scene, cost associated with performing a thorough investigation and the need for additional assistance or other experts.

Forensic psychiatry expert witness Dr. Roy Lubit is board certified in forensic psychiatry, child psychiatry and general psychiatry. He writes this on forensic evaluations:

Critiquing adverse forensic evaluations is a special art. It is inadequate to simply produce a competing evaluation, so that there is now one on each side. Key weaknesses in many reports include the expert simultaneously making speculative comments and ignoring important material that was available which contradicted their conclusions. I have even seen evaluators ignore the significance of data they reported in the body of their report. Other common problems include failing to access available information and simply accepting a litigants’ presentation of their histories as true.

Adverse expert reports can often be destroyed by carefully showing that the report’s conclusions are simply speculations supported by cherry picking of the data, and that a full consideration of the available information demonstrates that other hypotheses are more likely to be correct. This technique has even be successful when I was hired by one side to critique the report of a neutral evaluator.

In Madoff Investor Alerts, securities expert witness Chris McConnell, AIFA, writes on fiduciary duty:

Breach of Fiduciary Duty (BFD) is pervasive in today’s volatile financial environment, primarily due to two elements: 1) investment pros have not been properly trained, if at all, in the standards of fiduciary responsibility, and 2) some are allowed to operate “under the radar” as “investment professionals” without proper credentials or licensing. Particularly troubling, the elderly, women and charities are often the targets of fraud and scams. Cultural and religious affinity scams, similar to Madoff’s targeting of Jewish charitable groups and donors, are on the rise due to feeder fund agents’ infiltration into social, religious and philanthropic causes; often with ulterior motives.

BFD (Breach of fiduciary duty) is often the root cause of investor’s losses “Any asset, at any time, in any type of account, at any financial institution, may become subject to fiduciary duty standards, including real estate, securities, futures, insurance policies (life and annuity), intellectual property; or even closely-held businesses and partnerships.”

A U.S. court has ruled that a vaccination for certain childhood diseases is not linked to autism, as claimed by parents of children who suffer from the brain disorder. The ruling Thursday is a blow to at least 4,800 families who have filed similar claims and are seeking compensation through the government’s “Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.” VOA.com also reports:

The special court in Washington ruled Thursday against the parents of three children, saying the families had failed to prove their claims. In his decision, the special master, George L. Hastings Jr., ruled that the government’s medical expert witnesses were “far better qualified, far more experienced and far more persuasive” than the Cedillos’. Although the family had to show only that the preponderance of evidence was on their side, Mr. Hastings ruled that the evidence was “overwhelmingly contrary” to their argument.

Mike Sexton, host of the “World Poker Tour” and a 30-year poker pro, will be called as a gambling expert witness in the illegal gambling trial of five players busted during the police raid of a home tournament three years ago. Sexton, of Las Vegas, will contend that their chosen game of Texas Hold ’em relies more on skill to win than on illegal gambling chance, which is at the heart of the players’ defense. Sexton has a long resume in the poker world, helping to coordinate corporate endorsements and sponsorships behind broadcast poker tournaments. “The success of the World Poker Tour can largely be chalked up to his credit,” according to the Poker Listings Web site.

Also scheduled to testify is Robert Hannum, a statistics expert witness and professor at the University of Denver. Both men recently gave affidavits, filed this week at Mount Pleasant’s Municipal Court, defending the merits of Texas Hold ’em and the need for skill in mathematics, money management, bluffing, card play and reading an opponent to be successful.

Excerpted from Charleston.net.

In Clinical Standards in Medicine medical expert witness Barry E. Gustin, MD, MPH, FAAEM, writes:

Medical negligence litigators seek to establish which clinical standards are pertinent to their case, define what these clinical standards are, and then set out to demonstrate how the clinical standards were not followed.

Historically, from the physicians’ point of view, the issue of “clinical standards” has evoked much apprehension and concern. Physicians claim, and with some fervor, that creating specific standards of care can not be done because each patient is unique, the variables are often myriad and complex, and the deductive reasoning and creative process which leads to a successful diagnosis and treatment would be hindered. They further argue that clinical standards will ultimately increase physicians’ liability exposure and thus will do more harm than good.

In Challenges in Recovering Deleted Email, electronic discovery expert witness Steve Burgess writes:

Both computer forensics experts and data recovery technicians seek to recover deleted data. Data recovery is primarily interested in bringing back files, while computer forensics tends to dig deeper, looking not just for deleted documents, but also for metadata (data about data – such as file attributes, descriptions, dates, and other information) and meaningful snippets of unrecoverable files. One area of particular interest is email.

When most documents are written to a computer’s hard disk, each newly created document has its own directory entry (what the user sees as a listing in a folder). If a file has been deleted, but has not been overwritten by another document, the recovery process is a relatively trivial part of e-discovery or of data recovery. But when the data of interest is from deleted email, the discovery process is likely to differ significantly from that of data recovery. Individual emails are stored differently than individual files. Different types of email programs store data differently on the user’s hard disk and require different schemes for finding useful information. As a result, the deletion of emails and recovering of deleted emails differs not only from that for other types of documents, but also between different types of email programs.