When attorneys get a copy of opposing counsel's expert reports, sometimes they are quite surprised by what they read - it's just bad science. And, in these cases they will then retain their own expert to counter, and possibly quash, the other experts opinion. I've been retained in numerous cases to do this, and I'll discuss four to illustrate the benefit this has, and to help illustrate the kind of work that I do.
I was recently retained on a civil case just a month before the trial date. When called about the case, I was told that the firm never thought of hiring a forensic photographer until one showed up in opposing counsel’s expert list. In this case, I needed to photograph the scene of an accident to depict what could be seen from a specific perspective, at a specific time of day, under specific lighting conditions.
My post on Synchronizing Video has generated a few comments related to image resolution. Three people, all of whom have a significant background in forensic imaging, have made rather divergent comments. Multiple topics are being addressed, from crime scene, accident and evidence photography to latent print photography to SWGFAST guidelines/requirements to the resolution of video security camera systems.
It always surprises me how often retaining attorneys send me digital copies of scanned color laser prints of photos in PDF format, or transcoded video files to do an analysis.
On a recent case opposing counsel hired a forensic photographer. The case involved an accident at night in which visibility was a key factor.