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.

When educating your employees about the content of an e-mail or using other forms of traceable electronic technology, train the employee to ask themselves these simple questions:

Should I put this in e-mail or should I call?

The man who calls himself Clark Rockefeller was sentenced Friday to four to five years in state prison for his conviction in the kidnapping of his daughter last summer, ending a colorful chapter in the bizarre saga of the German national whom police call a “person of interest” in an ongoing California homicide investigation. Rockefeller’s two lawyers tried to cast him as a mentally disturbed man who believed in the fantasy world he had created and said he should be acquitted on grounds of insanity.

But the jury rejected the defense argument and found Rockefeller guilty on two of the four counts against him: parental kidnapping and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The defense presented two experts who testified that Rockefeller’s mental illnesses caused him to believe in his invented lives, including that he was a member of the storied Rockefeller family. “Expert witness testimony figured prominently,” jury foreman Michael Gregory said. The state’s psychology expert witness countered that Rockefeller suffers from a mental disorder but exaggerated his symptoms and was legally sane when he abducted his daughter.

Excerpted from Boston.com

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.

Please take the time necessary to prepare your case for submission to the laboratory. Proper preparation is essential to ensure that the examiner has the documents necessary for a meaningful examination and comparison, and that the request is clearly worded and understood. If assistance is needed before or during the preparation process, please contact the FDE for assistance.

It is extremely important to remember that if the documents being submitted are for handwriting examination, a substantial percentage of the known writing should repeat the questioned material. If possible, the collected writings should have been written around the same time as the questioned writing, and the requested writing as close to the date of the questioned writing as possible.

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

Q. Is my security expert qualified?

A. The security profession is a collection of specialties. While there are basic concepts common to all, each specialty requires its own unique blend of training and experience. Unfortunately many so-called “security experts” claim almost universal expertise and often make claims that their documented training and experience can’t support. Look for the following in a qualified security expert:

In Fire Investigation Reports: The Key to Writing a Quality Report fire expert witness and Principal of Pyrocop, Inc., Robert Rowe “Who is your audience?”

When writing a fire investigation report, the fire investigator should determine who the target audience will be (i.e. attorneys, insurance companies, public entities, etc.) and write the report for that particular audience. Remember, the person reading the report may know nothing about fire investigation.

The fire investigator must also avoid terminology that only fire investigators understand. If you do use terminology known only to fire experts, then be sure to explain the terms. Below are a few examples;

In Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Hospitality Industry hospitality expert witness Maurice Robinson writes on ADR neutrality and experience.

Regardless of the provider, it is critical to the resolution of the disputes that the “neutrals”, those individuals empowered to resolve the disputes, possess both impartiality and industry experience. The clear advantage of using members of ISHC’s ADR Panel is to bring not only neutrality and independence to the process, but to ensure that industry experience and understanding is applied when reviewing facts, analysis and testimony,

and in arriving at findings and conclusions, solutions and awards. ISHC members are professionals who abide by strict professional standards of independence that have been well established and recognized by the hospitality industry for many years. It is thus their independence, industry knowledge and professional expertise that is brought to the ADR process and makes an ISHC solution to ADR so desirable.

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.

In many cases we have found that most policies do not adequately cover what is necessary in the computer and electronic communication age. Companies should have a very clear e-mail and technology use policy. One of the more important ones usually not covered, and unfortunately to the detriment of the employer, is an e-mail retention policy. Since many industries are governed by different and specific federal and/or state statutes on how long information must be retained, your policy should reflect these guidelines.

The policy should be as specific as possible in what types of communications are kept and how long. Make it clear there are both business and legal reasons for the company keeping such information. Information from e-mails as well as other electronic systems can be used in many types of cases, including: harassment, discrimination, antitrust, retaliation, Americans with Disabilities Act, insider trading, accounting fraud, improper trade secret disclosure and more!

Joseph E. Bonadiman, PhD, PE, writes on Experience versus education in forensic engineering:

The practicing engineer, that professional who keeps a pair of work boots in the back of his sedan and who has hands-on experience with every stage of a project, might at first seem a distant second choice to the gilded aura of the academic expert. This individual would have less experience presenting or discussing complex engineering concepts with anyone except other engineers who already grasp the subject. Technical terms might be difficult for an engineer to convey in a way a layman would understand; on the other hand, it is not impossible to conceive of a practicing engineer as having attained sufficient social qualities that enable him to competently relay complicated information in an understandable way. For example, he may be a principal in an engineering firm where he makes presentations to private and public entities. Regardless of the way he comes about his mixture of qualifications, is that mix enough to make him the best choice for an expert witness?

Excerpted from The Forensic Examiner, Winter, 2007

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 preparing a work request.

After separating the documents into questioned and known, the next step is to prepare a work request. The work request can be a specially designed form or letter. Regardless of which format is used the work request should contain the following elements:

a. A specific and complete description of the submitted documents, both questioned and known.

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

Regardless of the focus of your practice, there may be a place for a qualified security expert in your legal tool kit. Consider making these suggestions to your client:

• In employment situations, have a qualified security expert review policies and practices with regard to employee selection and screening, employee honesty, and workplace violence prevention and response.