Tag Archives: case

How to Succeed as an Expert Witness by Looking at Each Case from the Other Expert’s Perspective

Posted on by

If you take cases for both plaintiffs and defense, then you must understand both perspectives so you can undertake your part well for either side. It will help, as well, if you can anticipate what the other side’s expert is likely to do. You know he or she is going to look closely at your report, so you have to be doubly careful about what you write. Think about the basis for each opinion you will express.
Regardless of whether you are acting as an expert witness for the plaintiff or for the defense, your goal is to assess whether each of the steps taken by the other side’s expert made sense. Was it proper, necessary, and complete enough to lead to the stated opinion? Assess whether any portion of the expert’s logic suffered from mistaken assumption or oversight. If so, your attorney can then legitimately use your assessments to undermine the credibility of the expert or the opinion.
More than one possibility often exists. A common error made by people in general is to take the easy way out and say: “that was the only way possible.” Bridge players may say there was no other way to play the cards. Backgammon players may say there was no other way to play the dice. Expert witnesses may say that their opinion is the only sensible one. Don’t assume that the way taken is the only way; look for other possibilities, and explore them.
If you are the plaintiff’s expert, Think About all the possibilities. Prepare to explain why you may have chosen one or only a subset of the possibilities as the basis for your opinion.
If you are the defendant’s expert, list other possibilities that the plaintiff’s expert should have considered, and why.
Pointing out other possibilities may be enough to generate reasonable doubt or to undermine the credibility of the other side’s expert.

Judd Robbins has been an internationally recognized expert witness since 1986 in the US and in the UK. In 2010, his book “Expert Witness Training” was published by Presentation Dynamics. Robbins has advanced degrees from UC Berkeley and the University of Michigan, has been an Information Systems manager and an Education Systems manager, and consults in both computer and legal issues. Learn more about Mr. Robbins and his Expert Witness Training materials at www.juddrobbins.com

Related Expert Witness Articles

Advocacy Group, A Just Cause, Meets With Congressmen On Capitol Hill About IRP6 Case; Shares How IRP Software Will Help Fight Terrorism and Keep America Safe

Posted on by


Denver, Colorado (PRWEB) July 22, 2014

Advocacy group, A Just Cause, announces today that its team has had recent successful meetings with members of Congress in Washington D.C. regarding the IRP6 case. The team shared information with Congress about the law enforcement software that IRP Solutions had developed and found that there is still a need for legislation to support equipping law enforcement agencies with innovative investigations software. A Just Cause believes that the software developed by the IRP6 is critical to the United States fight against terror.

The IRP6 case concerns an African-American company (IRP Solutions Corporation) in Colorado that developed criminal investigations software for federal, state and local law enforcement. The IRP6 were convicted in 2011 and have been incarcerated at the Federal Prison Camp in Florence, Colorado for two years while A Just Cause questions the unusual length of time for getting an appellate decision. The IRP6 and supporters continue to maintain their innocence and are seeking intervention from Congress (D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA).

The advocacy organization believes that the federal government’s efforts to track terrorist organizations and collaborate with other agencies in the war on terror could be resolved with Case Investigative Lifecycle (CILC) software developed by the now-jailed CEO and former executives of IRP Solutions Corporation. “A Just Cause is pushing for the release of the IRP6 so they can get back to what they were doing… helping to make this country safe,” argues Sam Thurman, A Just Cause.

“We have found that the software developed by IRP Solutions meets or exceeds many of the requirements called out by the 9/11 Commission, as well as what is suggested as best practices by the National Institute of Justice,” says Sam Thurman, A Just Cause. “While the 9-11 Commission Report was released some time back, the issues still exist. The CILC software made such a splash in the market that it was featured in the Law Enforcement Technology Magazine (http://www.officer.com/search?q=irp+solutions), Police Magazine (http://www.policemag.com/channel/technology/articles/2004/02/software-spotlight.aspx and http://www.policemag.com/channel/technology/photogallery/2010/01/law-enforcement-software.aspx), and it was referenced in the 8th Edition of ‘Criminal Investigation,’ a textbook written by Wayne Bennett and Karen Hess (Criminal Investigation, Bennett and Hess, 2007, Thomson Wadsworth),” adds Thurman.

Efforts to track terrorist activities was brought to the forefront with the 9/11 Commission Report. The 9/11 Commission Report states, “The FBI did not have the capability to link the collective knowledge of agents in the field to national priorities.” The report further stated, “The FAA’s capabilities to take aggressive, anticipatory security measures were especially weak.” (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, August 2004, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/).

The 9/11 Commission analysis stated, “The FBI did not have an adequate mechanism for validating source reporting, nor did it have a system for adequately tracking and sharing source reporting, either internally or externally” (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, August 2004, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/).

Based on forensic evidence presented during the IRP6 trial, we believe that IRP’s CILC software is designed will fulfill the government’s requirements,” says Thurman (Califorensics Analysis, Case 1:09-cr-00266-CMA Document 298-2, 10/8/10 USDC Colorado).

“I am 100% confident that CILC can immediately help the FBI resolve the case management challenges identified by Jack Israel. CILC was designed to be able to do what no other investigative software in the world could – morph itself to work within the process of any law enforcement agency,” says Gary Walker, IRP6 (CEO, IRP Solutions Corporation).

Court records (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA) show that during the trial of the IRP executives, software forensics expert Don Vilfer of Califorensics analyzed the CILC software. According to the analysis conducted by Califorensics, “The software (CILC) contained many notable features, making it a functional product for the intended consumer (Califorensics Analysis, Case 1:09-cr-00266-CMA Document 298-2, 10/8/10 USDC Colorado).” Court records also show that the report stated, “No one software application would meet the needs of all agencies, but the functionality that we observed in our review of the CILC software would undoubtedly be of interest to many law enforcement agencies (Califorensics Analysis, Case 1:09-cr-00266-CMA Document 298-2, 10/8/10 USDC Colorado).”

“Court records show that evidence of the validity of the CILC software, as well as other key testimony were not allowed during trial,” says Thurman. “There is solid proof that the executives of IRP Solutions were engaged with the Department of Homeland Security to the extent of providing a quote to deliver one module of their software to the government… a quote that exceeded $ 100 million (for the Consolidated Enforcement Environment Initiative). I must add that the federal government has already spent over $ 1 Billion on what the government has called failed efforts at this type of software (Virtual Case File and Sentinel, http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0740/intro.htm),” concludes Thurman.

“This week I visited a Congressman in Washington, D.C. who conceded that federal agents still do not have the tools needed to track and fight terrorism,” says Lamont Banks, A Just Cause. “God forbid a terror attack on the scale of 9/11 strikes this nation again. Let’s imagine if the IRP6 were not incarcerated and their software was in full use throughout the country, could something like the Boston Marathon bombing have been avoided,” questions Banks. “That is a very real scenario that people need to consider while six patriots sit in prison for over two years waiting on an appeal,” adds Banks. “We are asking American citizens to take a hard look at this case and demand that the IRP6 be released. These men believe in this country, and I believe that they have developed something that is truly vital in our war on terror,” says Banks.    

A Just Cause has released information showing that court records (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA) confirm expert witnesses for the IRP6 were not allowed to testify during trial. Andrew Albarelle, Principal Executive Officer of Remy Corporation, a Denver-based staffing company, took the stand to testify on behalf of the defendants, but Judge Arguello dismissed Mr. Albarelle before he could testify. (Discover: Albarelle Letter, Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA). “The anomalies in this case are egregious without question”, says Thurman. “When you consider the expert witness situation, Judge Arguello violating the men’s Fifth Amendment, and then the gross injustice of denying them over 200 pages of transcript that we believe will prove their innocence…there is no question in our minds that the IRP6 should not be in prison. There is also no question in our mind that there is enough evidence to warrant an investigation in this case,” adds Thurman.

“In addition to the unusually long lag in the appellate process, A Just Cause questions the inconsistent feedback from the various court employees,” states Ethel Lopez, A Just Cause. “The Judicial Assistant to Appellate Judge Hartz stated that they are done with the case, but the former Deputy Clerk of the Court Doug Cressler stated previously that it has not been decided, and yet another time it was stated that the case is with the ‘writing judge’. These inconsistencies raise a red flag,” argues Lopez.

The IRP6 (Kendrick Barnes, Gary L. Walker, Demetrius K. Harper, Clinton A. Stewart, David A. Zirpolo and David A. Banks) have been incarcerated for over two years (US District Court for the District of Colorado, Judge Christine M. Arguello, D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA; Case Nos: NO. 11-1487, Case Nos. 11-1488, 11-1489, 11-1490, 11-1491 and 11-1492).

Appellate Court panel includes the Honorable Senior Judge Bobby R. Baldock, Honorable Judge Harris L. Hartz, and Honorable Judge Jerome A. Holmes

For more information about the story of the IRP6 or for copies of the legal filings go to http://www.freetheirp6.org.

Related press releases: http://www.a-justcause.com/#!press-releases/c21pq







Find More Expert Witness Press Releases

Expert Witness – enhance the strength of your legal case

Posted on by

When it comes to winning a case in court you need to make sure that everything is running in your favour. You’ll need to make use of as many favourable witnesses as you can to support your claims and demands. Without witnesses in your support your case will fall before it has begun. However, despite having said this, there are some types of case which don’t require witnesses to reach success. One of the most common of these is personal injury claims. To win at this case you’re going to need the services of a medico-legal firm.

These companies boast a range of certified professionals from doctors to solicitors who have the skills needed to bring your case to justice. One of their most fundamental assets is their ability to offer you an expert witness. Despite the name, the term does not refer to people who have seen a crime with their own eyes! They are certified professionals who are called upon to court to offer their expertise on a fact or piece of evidence that the judge isn’t sure on. In terms of your personal injury, an expert witness can validate your injuries and even explain how they happened. Expert witnesses can be provided by the court but if your case is only for a small claim you’re probably going to need to produce your own.

What to look for from a medico-legal company?

Expert witnesses can normally be found from medico-legal companies. It’s up to you to find the right
one to acquire services from.

Certified: Although any medical professional will be helpful to your case it is in your best interest to ensure that they are also certified. They will obviously need to be registered as an expert witness but should hopefully also be certified by the GMC (General Medical Council) and by the MDU (Medical Defence Union). This will help to heighten the authenticity of their expert opinion.

Successful: Many medico-legal companies will be more than happy to list a ‘testimonials’ page or a ‘previous clients’ page on their website. Check these sections out and learn which cases their expert witnesses have supported before. If they have a solid track record you can be confident in their ability to help win your case.

Fairly Priced: Your personal injury claim will be more than likely to sue for compensation in order to cover your time off of work. If you hire an expert witness who costs the earth it will defeat the point of your claim altogether. Use the internet to compare and contrast a vast range of companies to find a company who can offer you a reasonable price.

An expert witness can drastically enhance the strength of your case/claim. For personal injuries especially, their experience in the medical world can affirm to a judge the seriousness of your injuries and help in securing you the money that you deserve.

Don’t let the guilty get away with their crime – utilise an Expert Witness and unleash the legal power of a professional opinion.

Related Expert Witness Articles

How to admit an expert witness in a mock trial case?

Posted on by

Question by AHS: How to admit an expert witness in a mock trial case?
I know what expert witnesses are and what they are used for but I do not know how to ask the judge if I can admit them. I know once you give credit towards the witnesses education and/or experities, you say “your Honor, I would like to admit _________ as an expert witness” I need help asking if I can admit the witness by saying it formally…any information would be great. Thanks

Best answer:

Answer by KC V ™
Well…to start…as a part of “discovery” your expert witness should already be subpoenaed and as such you would only need to call him to testify from the court room.

Also…you’re not “admitting” him but “calling” him to testify. As an example “The defense now calls Mr. Expert to the stand.”

It would then be up to the defense or prosecution to voir dire him/her as an expert!

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!