by

Investigators in Michael Jackson’s sudden death have turned their focus towards the prescription drugs that the pop legend had been taking and a mysterious doctor who was with him when he went into cardiac arrest. Detectives with the Los Angeles Police Department’s Robbery-Homicide Unit reportedly were seeking to question a doctor who was in the late entertainer’s Holmby Hills’ mansion Thursday, when his heart stopped.

Dr. Conrad Murray, a cardiologist with offices in Las Vegas and Houston, was identified by a Jackson advisor as the 50-year-old singer’s personal medical expert for three years. Murray was hired by organizers to assure Jacko’s health during the comeback concert series that had been planned for next month at the O2 arena in London. Murray reportedly witnessed Jackson’s collapse and went off radar shortly after Jackson was pronounced dead.

A spokesman for the LAPD said that investigators had spoken to Murray briefly Thursday but they intended to speak to him again. It is reported that Murray was performing CPR when paramedics arrived at Jackson’s house Thursday.

Continue reading

by

Forensic engineering expert witness Andrew Yarmus writes that on May 12, 2009, the Epoch Times reported that newly announced NYC legislation will enhance safety protocols, oversight, and inter-agency communication at construction, demolition, and abatement site across the city. The new legislation incorporates 33 recommendations to enhance standpipe and sprinkler safety, improve inter-agency communication, increase safety at construction and demolition sites, regulate oversight, and improve safety of asbestos abatement. From TheEpochTimes.com:

The new legislation includes 11 bills that include the following measures:

• Implementation of the uniform color coding of standpipe and sprinkler systems for ease of identification in case of emergency;

Continue reading

by

Sexual abuse expert witnesses Professor Vanessa Munro of The University of Nottingham and Dr Louise Ellison of the University of Leeds found jurors have a poor understanding of the various ways in which women might react when raped, the levels and types of injuries they might sustain and the different behaviors they might display in the witness box.

The researchers, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, set up mock court cases to examine how jurors reacted to different pieces of evidence and how these were then discussed in the jury room.

In particular, they found that many jurors expect rape victims to:

Continue reading

by

Army Corps of Engineers officials said Tuesday that water is flowing through the 48-year-old Howard Hanson Dam’s right abutment “very fast” and may mean the earth-and-rock structure could erode if too much water is stored behind the dam. By November the Corps will install a “grout curtain” to reduce seepage and will drill more vertical and horizontal drains 32 miles upstream from Auburn, WA, at a cost of over $20 million.

Planning will then begin on a permanent solution, which is likely several years away. Hydrology and dam safety experts from around the country are advising the Corps on those interim measures and possible long-term solutions. The speed at which water is seeping through a flank of the Howard Hanson Dam has, by one key measure, increased since January, and the people who operate the dam don’t know why.

Excerpted from TheSeattleTimes.com.

by

Justin Grodin was found guilty Wednesday of killing his 11-month-old step daughter Gretchen in 2000. Grodin had been in and out of court over the last nine years over his competency and mental state. Psychiatry expert witness Dr. Frederick Schaerf of Fort Meyers testified for the defense Tuesday regarding Grodin’s “mental illness” but the jury didn’t buy it.

Grodin had multiple outbursts and showed strange behavior in court over the last two weeks but the judge declared Grodin fit for trial. Medical expert witness Doctor Frederick Scharef saw Grodin 8 times since 2003 and said there is no doubt that at times Grodin is malingering or faking.

Excerpted from WinkNews.com.

by

Wayne and Cathy Makowski testified in their wrongful death suit against Brickman Management Co., the McDonald’s franchisee, and B & B Cash Grocery Stores, the owner of the U.S. 41 shopping center that is home to the restaurant. The lawsuit alleges the businesses failed to provide adequate security to keep their son Anthony, 21, safe in the early morning brawl at a McDonald’s in Land O’Lakes.

The security expert witness for the plaintiffs said last week that incidents like parking lot fights have a probability of escalating into something worse and the restaurant should have had something in place, such as a security guard, to deter them. An expert for the defense countered Monday that alcohol-fueled fights between strangers that result in a death are rare, thus impossible to foresee and prepare for. Gregg McCrary, a former FBI agent, said the shopping center was not an area known for violent crime – only for late-night nuisances – and that restaurant employees responded appropriately when the fight broke out.

Excerpted from TampaBay.com.

by

The Nebraska Supreme Court issued a decision Friday upholding Edward Poindexter’s conviction in the 1971 killing of police officer Larry Minard Sr. The Omaha police officer responded to a call for help at a vacant house and was killed when a suitcase found at the house, and rigged with a bomb, exploded.

The state Supreme Court found no merit in Poindexter’s claims of misconduct by prosecutors, ineffective defense and errors made during his trial. Poindexter alleged his defense attorneys were ineffective in their cross examination of witnesses, did not inquire about missing police reports, and did not offer evidence discrediting expert witnesses or evidence concerning a 911 tape recording. The court also rejected Poindexter’s arguments.

Excerpted from JournalStar.com.

by

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

As an owner/supervisor, take a moment to examine your current IT or company’s technology policy. If your company doesn’t currently have an IT or technology policy-get one! While you will need to insure the individual needs of your company are met, following are some topics of what you should consider including in your usage polices:

Electronic information ownership Monitoring of technology use Acceptable use of company technology Acceptable content

Continue reading

by

Medical expert Mark Gorney, MD, is co-founder and senior consultant for The Doctors Company says that physicians “must accept that behavior and personality play an absolutely critical role in the outcome of malpractice action.” Winning a malpractice lawsuit requires more than proving your treatment was appropriate, prudent, and conformed to the standard of care. “Exit polls consistently reveal that juries are at least as heavily influenced by their feelings about the players as they are by the facts of the case.” Dr. Gorney suggests showing a little humility.

“When you are the target of a malpractice lawsuit, it is not very different than an illness,” Dr. Gorney counsels. “This time you are the patient. Although we all know that doctors make the worst patients, your own personality characteristics may determine whether the verdict comes back for the defense or [includes] several million dollars in punitive damages.”
Excerpted from CortlandtForum.

by

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 some final thoughts.

A very important point to remember, all of the submitted collected or nonrequest and known writing used in the examination and comparison process must be admitted as evidence in court at the time of trial. All conclusions in the results of the examination section of the report are based on the examination and comparison of the submitted questioned and all of the known writings. Any change in the number, status, or admissibility of any of the writing submitted for examination and comparison, including the exclusion of examined writing at the time of trial, will impact upon the conclusions as stated in the report. In this case, the conclusions in the report are no longer valid and a new examination and comparison will have to be conducted using only the writing that will be admitted into evidence. The reason, the conclusion reached by the examination and comparison process is based on the combined significance of the evidence in the examined writing. The same is true if additional writing is added at the time of trial.

All examinations and comparisons must be conducted in an appropriate setting, using recognized and acceptable techniques, and examination aids as necessary. While testifying as a witness in court, during a deposition, or any other judicial situation absolutely NO examinations and comparisons will be performed. NO new opinions will be given, on or off the record, until a comprehensive examination and comparison of the evidence has been done. The only opinions given as part of the expert testimony in court or at a deposition will be those based on acceptable examination and comparison procedures and reported in either a verbal or written report.