Not guilty


A few weeks ago, a defense attorney reached out to me for help with an upcoming felony bench trial. He had several questions surrounding the anticipated testimony of the prosecution's expert witness and needed a consultant, not a testifying expert. The prosecution's expert was prepared to testify that some of the things they found on the defendant's computer were proof of wrongdoing. The expert's explanation for what he thought happened was a reasonable one, but he claimed that it was the only one. I told the defense attorney that I would need to do some research.

Within a day, I was able to send him a short report that answered his questions and provided two reasonable alternative possibilities (emphasis on reasonable; I don't peddle hokum). We scheduled a follow-up call to discuss my findings and some potential lines of questioning. Then, he asked me to prepare screenshots to illustrate one of the possibilities that I had suggested.

At trial, the prosecution's expert committed to what he had said in his written report: there was only one possibility. The defense attorney then showed him the screenshots that I had prepared and he admitted that this second possibility (which did not implicate the defendant) was also reasonable. The judge emphasized this when he found the defendant not guilty.

If you need someone with deep technical skills to assess and analyze the findings of an opposing expert (or your own expert), I would love the opportunity to work with you. Please contact me: steven@tracedf.com.

I'm happy to work on civil or criminal cases (with the prosecution or the defense), as a consultant or a testifying expert.

#felony #acquittal #computerforensics

Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Archive
Search By Tags
No tags yet.
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square