by

Seattle undercover detectives may have violated police department rules on June 21st when they pursued a driver in a high speed chase. The department’s rules state that “unmarked cars shall not participate in pursuits.” Police say that Jesse James Toro II cut off three undercover officers in traffic which resulted in a high speed chase. Prosecutors say Toro then shot the tires out of the officers’ SUV.

Police conduct expert witness D.P. Van Blaricom, a former Bellevue police chief, says there is good reason for the regulation against unmarked cars getting involved in high speed pursuits. The problem of chasing somebody in an unmarked car is that they don’t know who the hell is chasing them,” said Van Blaricom, who frequently testifies as an expert witness regarding police conduct.

Toro’s defense claims the officers chased Toro at speeds of more than 100 miles an hour and broke departmental rules reports the SeattlePI.com http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/.

by

Pain management expert witness Dr. Forest Tennant testified July 2nd that untreated chronic pain will break down the human body. Tennant heads a pain research clinic and is an expert witness for the defense of Dr. William Mangino, a Pennsylvania doctor being prosecuted for violations of the state’s drug act. Reports the New Castle News, Tennant viewed files of 11 of Mangino’s patients and commented that the guidelines for pain management “were quite well followed.”

Tennant, a founder of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, said the standards are that a doctor has to believe the patient and provide enough relief for the pain without sedating or impairing the patient….”Pain itself is a deadly disease,” Tennant said, noting it can cause detrimental hormone changes in the brain, spinal cord and adrenal glands. “People with acute pain start rusting out from the inside if they don’t get pain relief, and it’s important to treat pain,” he said.

by

Deptford, NJ, Police Patrolman John Gillespie is charged with aggravated assault and official misconduct after allegedly choking and beating Joseph Rao Jr., 20, during a traffic stop and arrest in February 2006. Last week the jury heard testimony from Rao himself. Expert witnesses then called to testify in the case included William Pearson, a law enforcement veteran from Morristown and the New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice. The second witness called to the stand by the prosecution was Deptford Patrolman Sandra Reid. Ried processed the arrest of Rao on Feb. 2, 2006. The trial will resume Thursday with use of force expert witnesses. The trial is expected to last through the week of July 13th reports the CourierPostOnline.

by

Last week the divorce trial of Peter and Nancy Tauck topped Connecticut records for time and money spent. Over $10.5 million has been spent and even the FBI got involved when Nancy Tauch claimed her husband’s laptop had child pornography on it. Mrs. Tauck’s attorneys told Robert Rabetsky, a computer expert witness, to deliver copies of a CD of images downloaded from the laptop’s hard drive to the Westport police and the U.S. attorney’s office. “I was told to make sure an FBI agent received it,” Rabetsky testified.

But that charge is not likely to stick. By examining the cache or memory on the computer, expert witnesses on both sides testified that Peter Tauck could not have downloaded the pornographic images. Mr. Tauck was in Tahiti at the time and there was no evidence that the computer was accessed remotely. Someone did access the computer and it it likely that it was Mrs. Tauck. W. Anthony Whitledge, Nancy Tauck’s computer forensics expert witness, testified that he could not rule out the possiblity that the wife did it, reports The Hartfort Courant.

by

Vermont Department of Corrections Health Director Dr. Susan Wehry says her state has 46% of its inmates on psychotropic medications which is the highest of any state in the country. Vermont also has highest number of inmates getting more than one psychiatric medication. The statistics are troubling to both prison rights advocates and corrections officials. “The question is why,” said Dr. Jeffrey Metzner, a Denver-based psychiatrist and expert witness who has studied prison mental health systems around the country, including Vermont’s. “They ought to figure out why.”

The problem in prison is (drugs are) given to a lot of people to quiet them down,” said prison mental health expert witness Dr. Terry Kupers, a California psychiatrist. “They’re over-prescribed for people who are not psychotic but who are not sleeping or who are causing disruptions in the prisons,” he said.

But Dr. Wehry says high numbers of inmates on psychiatric drugs is less a function of prisons than of prisoners. As reported in Boston.com, “Many arrive with substance abuse problems and soon learn some anti-psychotic drugs provide “a little buzz”…Many also arrive with several active prescriptions. “It is not at all uncommon for an offender to come in on three, four, five, or six medications for similar conditions” says Wehry.

by

Family law expert witness David Pollock testified in Donna Moonda’s murder trial that she would have received between $1.2 million and $1.6 million in a divorce settlement and more than $3million if her husband died. Moonda, a former nurse, faces death penaly charges in the death of her 69-year-old physician husband. Prosecutors accuse her of conspiring with drug dealer Damian Bradford to collect an inheritance.

The defendant originally gave authorities a description of the gunman, who would have been much smaller than Bradford. A psychology expert witness is expected to testify about how common it is for witnesses at a traumatic event to wrongly recall details and descriptions, as reported in The Tribune Chronicle.

by

Many expert witnesses do not realize that they can file suit against the law firm that retained the expert if the expert is sued for negligence.

In the 2005 California case of Forensis Group, Inc. v. Frantz, Townsend & Foldenauer, an expert witness was sued for professional negligence for his work in a wrongful death case involving a forklift. The law firm Frantz, Townsend & Foldenauer sued the forklift manufacturer on behalf of the family and retained a mechanical engineering expert witness. At his deposition, the expert did not identify any applicable safety standards, but when the manufacturer later moved for summary judgment, the expert stated in a declaration that the vehicle failed several safety standards. The court granted summary judgment, noting that the expert had contradicted himself. The family filed a malpractice suit against the law firm, and the expert. The expert cross-claimed against the law firm for equitable indemnity, alleging that because he was retained by the law firm, the lawyers should share the loss attributable to the expert’s unsuccessful opposition to the motion for summary judgment. The expert charged that the lawyers had not provided him with adequate information, had failed to rehabilitate him at his deposition, and had failed to brief the court on the law regarding the admissibility of evidence regarding industry standards.
Continue reading

by

The SEC’s civil fraud case against former Qwest chief executive Joe Nacchio will most likely not go to trial until 2009. The SEC asserts that Nacchio and other former Qwest officials falsely inflated revenue by $3 billion from 1999 to 2002. U.S. Magistrate Judge Craig Shaffer gave the parties until Oct. 15, 2008, to submit information on proposed expert witnesses. The judge said he does not expect to allow depositions of the securities expert witnesses. As reported in the Denver Post, the SEC plans to file a motion for summary judgment against Nacchio in August, asking that Nacchio be found guilty of all or part of the charges.

Nacchio, already convicted of illegal insider trading for stock sales from April to May 2001, is scheduled to be sentenced July 27 on his criminal conviction on 19 counts of illegal insider trading.

by

Thinking about becoming an expert witness? A logical first step is to figure out your area of expertise. Slate.com writes:

According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, an expert witness can be anyone with special “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” An expert can testify under the following conditions: The testimony must be based on sufficient facts or data; the testimony must be the product of reliable principles and methods; and the witness must have applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. In general, expert witnesses are called in when “scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.”

Always keep in mind that an expert witness must pass the Daubert test. Trial judges evaluate expert witnesses to determine whether their testimony is relevant and reliable. You must demonstrate that the evidence you present as an expert fits the facts of the case and your conclusions were derived from scientific methods.

by

The National Ground Water Association is hosting the 5th Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference in Dublin, OH, on July 24-25, 2007. Lawyers and environmental expert witness speakers will cover groundwater litigation cases and forensic environmental investigations. Topics for day two will include new water law regulations, groundwater models, risk assessment, ethics for attorneys and expert witnesses, and a mock trial. The NGWA website states:

The first four of these conferences have been outstanding as a direct result of lawyers and expert witnesses who became part of the process providing excellent quality presentations including trial reenactments.

The 2007 NGWA Ground Water Expo and Annual Meeting will take place in Orlando, Florida, December 4-7. The educational program ranges from drilling operations to professional development and numerous networking opportunities.