We thank you for considering our agency for your Expert Consultations and Legal Investigations in Personal Injury, Negligence & Death in Civil, Criminal and Probate litigation, with an emphasis on cases involving Death and Serious Bodily Injury. Please contact us for your free initial case evaluation!
Click the business card to download:
|
< Click Here > to learn "What is a Certified Forensic Death Investigator (CFDI)?"
< Click Here > to learn "What is a Certified Legal Investigator (CLI)?" < Click Here > to learn "What is a Certified Criminal Defense Investigator (CCDI)?" < Click Here > to learn "What is a Certified Forensic Interviewer-Forensic Testimonial Evidence Recovery (CFI-FTER)?" < Click Here > to learn "What is a Certified Forensic Science Investigator?" |
What does AFI-LLC do? Case studies to help you understand!
Subject Matter Expert Medicolegal Death Investigators available to review the records, reports, photographs and evidentiary documentation in order to provide an opinion, within the scope of our education, training and experience, as to the circumstances of the death and/or injury and causation.
In 1987 AFI-LLC was formed as Investigative Services of Colorado, and evolved as a general investigation agency providing service of process, individual address and employment locates, background checks and investigations, and assets & liabilities. These fundamental investigative services were in support of our full service civil and criminal investigations.
From 2002 through 2008 Dean and Karen, at different times, received education, training and experience in death investigation at a county medical examiner's office (Dean was involved with two). During that time they were responsible for initial case review for jurisdiction and response, scene investigation and evidence collection, body assessment and transport, forensic autopsy assistance, medical records review, evidence analysis, consultation with the forensic pathologist and final report. At all times as the primary investigators they were the main contact on their cases for the family, law enforcement, forensic pathologist and funeral home.
In addition, a variety of forensic training - from crime scene to photography and interview & interrogation to firearms and arrest control were received. Today we offer the same investigative services since 1987, and primarily legal investigation of personal injury, negligence and death in civil, criminal and probate cases. We also offer expert consultations in these areas specific to death and injury causation, as well as investigative protocol. AFI-LLC is proud to offer these niche services to investigators, attorneys, law enforcement and the victims and families of these traumatic and sometimes fatal events.
We are available for general civil, criminal and probate investigations, and to independently review and consult on these cases.
Below you will find some examples from civil and criminal cases involving legal investigation, expert consultations and expert witness services.
In 1987 AFI-LLC was formed as Investigative Services of Colorado, and evolved as a general investigation agency providing service of process, individual address and employment locates, background checks and investigations, and assets & liabilities. These fundamental investigative services were in support of our full service civil and criminal investigations.
From 2002 through 2008 Dean and Karen, at different times, received education, training and experience in death investigation at a county medical examiner's office (Dean was involved with two). During that time they were responsible for initial case review for jurisdiction and response, scene investigation and evidence collection, body assessment and transport, forensic autopsy assistance, medical records review, evidence analysis, consultation with the forensic pathologist and final report. At all times as the primary investigators they were the main contact on their cases for the family, law enforcement, forensic pathologist and funeral home.
In addition, a variety of forensic training - from crime scene to photography and interview & interrogation to firearms and arrest control were received. Today we offer the same investigative services since 1987, and primarily legal investigation of personal injury, negligence and death in civil, criminal and probate cases. We also offer expert consultations in these areas specific to death and injury causation, as well as investigative protocol. AFI-LLC is proud to offer these niche services to investigators, attorneys, law enforcement and the victims and families of these traumatic and sometimes fatal events.
We are available for general civil, criminal and probate investigations, and to independently review and consult on these cases.
Below you will find some examples from civil and criminal cases involving legal investigation, expert consultations and expert witness services.
Gunshots, Trajectories, and Evidence in a First Degree Attempted Homicide (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained to review and analyze records, reports, photographs, and records from the official investigating agencies, and provide an expert case review and consultation, specific to gunshot trajectory and related evidence.
The CSI statement indicates an accurate trajectory reading could not be obtained due to no second contact point. A trajectory rod could have been approximated using points of projectile and/or fragment impact. The photographs show only one trajectory rod placement, which was inconsistent with other impact defect evidence in determining the trajectory. The official theory of multiple shots and multiple projectile impacts was not supported by the evidence. The evidence supported a single shot caused the observed impact and vehicle damage. The visible points of impact, direction of deflection, visible copper fragments, and energy loss are consistent with a single round striking and not perforating either the driver’s side rear passenger door, and continuing to the driver’s sideview mirror. Additional investigative steps were not taken, including: 1) scene documentation, photography, and evidence collection; 2) examining the vehicle interior for fragments; 3) checking the vehicle door interior assembly; and 4) proper assessment of initial impact and trajectories.
On the eve of Dean’s evidentiary hearing testimony, the prosecution offered “a pretty amazing plea deal.” Originally charged with Attempt Murder 1 (Felony 2) and Illegal Discharge of a Firearm (Felony 5); and plead to a Menacing (Misdemeanor 1) no jail time and one year probation. This was “… thanks largely to your expertise and report… It made a huge difference in our case.”
Our agency was retained to review and analyze records, reports, photographs, and records from the official investigating agencies, and provide an expert case review and consultation, specific to gunshot trajectory and related evidence.
The CSI statement indicates an accurate trajectory reading could not be obtained due to no second contact point. A trajectory rod could have been approximated using points of projectile and/or fragment impact. The photographs show only one trajectory rod placement, which was inconsistent with other impact defect evidence in determining the trajectory. The official theory of multiple shots and multiple projectile impacts was not supported by the evidence. The evidence supported a single shot caused the observed impact and vehicle damage. The visible points of impact, direction of deflection, visible copper fragments, and energy loss are consistent with a single round striking and not perforating either the driver’s side rear passenger door, and continuing to the driver’s sideview mirror. Additional investigative steps were not taken, including: 1) scene documentation, photography, and evidence collection; 2) examining the vehicle interior for fragments; 3) checking the vehicle door interior assembly; and 4) proper assessment of initial impact and trajectories.
On the eve of Dean’s evidentiary hearing testimony, the prosecution offered “a pretty amazing plea deal.” Originally charged with Attempt Murder 1 (Felony 2) and Illegal Discharge of a Firearm (Felony 5); and plead to a Menacing (Misdemeanor 1) no jail time and one year probation. This was “… thanks largely to your expertise and report… It made a huge difference in our case.”
Life Insurance Appeal - Full Denial including Accident Double Indemnity - Seizure (Natural) or Drowning (Accident)
Our agency was retained to obtain records, reports, photographs, and records from the official investigating agencies, and provide an expert case review and consultation for to file an appeal direct to the insurance company to appeal their decision denying benefits to the widow.
Witnesses reported finding the decedent entangled and suspended from a mooring rope, bent at the waist, with his head submerged in the water. Scene and autopsy photographs support witness statements finding the decedent entangled in the mooring ropes. This includes the decedent’s shorts are observed dry in the scene photographs (below). The autopsy report did not mention important artifact to the decedent, and did other artifact. The insurance consulting internal medicine doctor did not see the autopsy or scene photographs; only harbor police and coroner reports. His review and report do not address these contributory findings, and the totality of the event and circumstances. Other evidence on the body placed the decedent's head at a lower point of gravity than his legs and feet. In totality, these are important evidence to the above point and correct circumstances.
The same doctor referenced epilepsy as the cause of death; however, the autopsy report and death certificate referenced epilepsy as, “...contributing to death but not resulting in the underlying cause given”. This is a common error and should be referenced as the death was "with" epilepsy vs "of" epilepsy or any medical or social history.
The decedent’s death was an Accident due to drowning caused by an unwitnessed fall onto dock mooring ropes, and suspension into the harbor head-first. This was independently confirmed by our consulting Forensic Pathologist.
On appeal the insurance company reversed and found in favor of the widow with full Accidental Double Indemnity benefits.
Our agency was retained to obtain records, reports, photographs, and records from the official investigating agencies, and provide an expert case review and consultation for to file an appeal direct to the insurance company to appeal their decision denying benefits to the widow.
Witnesses reported finding the decedent entangled and suspended from a mooring rope, bent at the waist, with his head submerged in the water. Scene and autopsy photographs support witness statements finding the decedent entangled in the mooring ropes. This includes the decedent’s shorts are observed dry in the scene photographs (below). The autopsy report did not mention important artifact to the decedent, and did other artifact. The insurance consulting internal medicine doctor did not see the autopsy or scene photographs; only harbor police and coroner reports. His review and report do not address these contributory findings, and the totality of the event and circumstances. Other evidence on the body placed the decedent's head at a lower point of gravity than his legs and feet. In totality, these are important evidence to the above point and correct circumstances.
The same doctor referenced epilepsy as the cause of death; however, the autopsy report and death certificate referenced epilepsy as, “...contributing to death but not resulting in the underlying cause given”. This is a common error and should be referenced as the death was "with" epilepsy vs "of" epilepsy or any medical or social history.
The decedent’s death was an Accident due to drowning caused by an unwitnessed fall onto dock mooring ropes, and suspension into the harbor head-first. This was independently confirmed by our consulting Forensic Pathologist.
On appeal the insurance company reversed and found in favor of the widow with full Accidental Double Indemnity benefits.
Murder and Conspiracy with a Deadly Weapon (Expert Consultation and Criminal Defense Investigation)
Our agency was contacted by a client for a complex criminal defense case involving their juvenile client and three juvenile co-defendants, involving a drive-by shooting and homicide of a young girl.
The defendant was charged with multiple counts, including conspiracy and driving the vehicle for the charged shooter. Over the course of several months it was learned the law enforcement investigation began and ended with the focus on only the four defendants and no other persons, despite multiple 911 calls describing and identifying at least one person fast-walking in the scene and also leaving the area with a handgun, video showing the rival group armed and questioned timing of the event - including the first shots, and continuing shots possibly starting with the rival group. Our extensive defense investigation found additional witnesses, details not found or reported by law enforcement, and our expert consultation reconstructing the scene and trajectories found these inconsistent with the defendant's vehicle, and consistent with report witness sightings of a potential suspect. Also, discrepancies in the law enforcement classification of the reported firearms and recovered casings and projectiles. The investigation also questioned the allegations and supported new witness statements of other potential suspects law enforcement identified and never contacted. Detailed discovery review found missing, mislabeled or misidentified evidence, and possibly exculpatory evidence never submitted for laboratory examination - including firearm, projectiles and spent casings, and video doorbell evidence.
At trial co-defendant charged with the shooting was found guilty. The defense negotiation's demonstrating the above findings and additional information presented by the attorney, resulted in a stipulated plea agreement the defendant and judge accepted.
"I want to thank you so much for helping me wade through all this complex discovery. You were instrumental in preparing a defense (you did so much more than law enforcement did!!!) Your maps, timelines, ballistic expertise, attention to detail, video condensation, and ability to locate and interview witnesses was critical to the case. I was so fortunate to work with you again."
Our agency was contacted by a client for a complex criminal defense case involving their juvenile client and three juvenile co-defendants, involving a drive-by shooting and homicide of a young girl.
The defendant was charged with multiple counts, including conspiracy and driving the vehicle for the charged shooter. Over the course of several months it was learned the law enforcement investigation began and ended with the focus on only the four defendants and no other persons, despite multiple 911 calls describing and identifying at least one person fast-walking in the scene and also leaving the area with a handgun, video showing the rival group armed and questioned timing of the event - including the first shots, and continuing shots possibly starting with the rival group. Our extensive defense investigation found additional witnesses, details not found or reported by law enforcement, and our expert consultation reconstructing the scene and trajectories found these inconsistent with the defendant's vehicle, and consistent with report witness sightings of a potential suspect. Also, discrepancies in the law enforcement classification of the reported firearms and recovered casings and projectiles. The investigation also questioned the allegations and supported new witness statements of other potential suspects law enforcement identified and never contacted. Detailed discovery review found missing, mislabeled or misidentified evidence, and possibly exculpatory evidence never submitted for laboratory examination - including firearm, projectiles and spent casings, and video doorbell evidence.
At trial co-defendant charged with the shooting was found guilty. The defense negotiation's demonstrating the above findings and additional information presented by the attorney, resulted in a stipulated plea agreement the defendant and judge accepted.
"I want to thank you so much for helping me wade through all this complex discovery. You were instrumental in preparing a defense (you did so much more than law enforcement did!!!) Your maps, timelines, ballistic expertise, attention to detail, video condensation, and ability to locate and interview witnesses was critical to the case. I was so fortunate to work with you again."
Attempted Murder and Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon (Expert Consultation)
Our agency’s most common investigations and consultations involve death and serious bodily injury, and analysis of the integrity of the official investigation and evidence. Two parties were involved, the resident (reporting victim) and her boyfriend (Defendant).
From our review of the photographs, we initially found:
- Defendant’s injuries were dicing (i.e. MVA) a/k/a pseudo-stippling.
-- Reporting victim’s injuries were 1) incised from unknown sharp-edged instrument – knife or glass; and 2) incised from fine-serrated knife. None were defensive and they were each different sources. She was sitting when injured, and she was not stabbed, nor was she injured other than two fingers to cause bleeding.
In the arrest warrant, the detective’s synopsis stated, “The Defendant broke into the victim’s apartment and waited until she arrived home and attempted to kill her by stabbing her several times but she was able to defend herself and only received injuries on her hands.”
Then we read the full law enforcement investigation (or lack thereof), and determined what did and did not happen.
The Defendant was inside the reporting victim’s apartment with permission and they were drinking beer and tequila shots together when she cut her left index finger with a fine-serrated knife and bled on the dining table. An argument and scuffle followed, pushing the Defendant into a nearby window, and causing dicing injuries to his right face. She cut her right palm-heel / little finger on broken glass, and only received injuries on her two fingers, requiring six stitches and no serious bodily injury. The Defendant left and the reporting victim tried to clean the blood, with her fingers still bleeding, and the material used was not absorbent and swiped blood around instead of cleaning it.
The detective's synopsis should have stated, properly investigated, should have said:
The Defendant was inside the victim’s apartment with permission and they were drinking beer and tequila shots together and she cut her left index finger with a fine-serrated knife and bled on the dining table, and only received injuries on her two fingers.
All charges related to Attempted Murder and Deliberation, Burglary and Menacing were dismissed in a plea to Assault with a Deadly Weapon Causing Injury.
Our agency’s most common investigations and consultations involve death and serious bodily injury, and analysis of the integrity of the official investigation and evidence. Two parties were involved, the resident (reporting victim) and her boyfriend (Defendant).
From our review of the photographs, we initially found:
- Defendant’s injuries were dicing (i.e. MVA) a/k/a pseudo-stippling.
-- Reporting victim’s injuries were 1) incised from unknown sharp-edged instrument – knife or glass; and 2) incised from fine-serrated knife. None were defensive and they were each different sources. She was sitting when injured, and she was not stabbed, nor was she injured other than two fingers to cause bleeding.
In the arrest warrant, the detective’s synopsis stated, “The Defendant broke into the victim’s apartment and waited until she arrived home and attempted to kill her by stabbing her several times but she was able to defend herself and only received injuries on her hands.”
Then we read the full law enforcement investigation (or lack thereof), and determined what did and did not happen.
The Defendant was inside the reporting victim’s apartment with permission and they were drinking beer and tequila shots together when she cut her left index finger with a fine-serrated knife and bled on the dining table. An argument and scuffle followed, pushing the Defendant into a nearby window, and causing dicing injuries to his right face. She cut her right palm-heel / little finger on broken glass, and only received injuries on her two fingers, requiring six stitches and no serious bodily injury. The Defendant left and the reporting victim tried to clean the blood, with her fingers still bleeding, and the material used was not absorbent and swiped blood around instead of cleaning it.
The detective's synopsis should have stated, properly investigated, should have said:
The Defendant was inside the victim’s apartment with permission and they were drinking beer and tequila shots together and she cut her left index finger with a fine-serrated knife and bled on the dining table, and only received injuries on her two fingers.
All charges related to Attempted Murder and Deliberation, Burglary and Menacing were dismissed in a plea to Assault with a Deadly Weapon Causing Injury.
Not an Execution / 1st Degree Murder (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by the defendant's attorney to assist in the criminal defense of fatal shooting. The defendant was charged with first-degree homicide in 2019. The lead law enforcement detective testified before a grand jury, less than two weeks post-event, the defendant executed the decedent with four gunshot wounds to back as he lay unconscious on the floor; he had no findings for why the decedent was unconscious. He further testified he had not attended the autopsy or read the report, available before and at his testimony. When a grand jury member presented the question of what evidence there was of an execution-style murder, the detective's testimony was the grouping and trajectory of the four gunshot wounds to the back and head.
In reviewing the evidence, including reports and photographs to assist with the gunshot wound entrances and exits with trajectory, and in developing location of the handgun (owned by the decedent), it was determined the decedent first brandished his handgun threatening the defendant. A struggle followed with the defendant having control of the handgun and the decedent blocking the only means of escape. In fear for his life, the defendant first fired and struck the decedent in the abdomen, then as further struggle followed, shot three more times as he fled the scene, striking the decedent in the back before he fell to the floor. This was evidence by a entrance wound of the abdomen not disclosed in the grand jury testimony, as well as the differing trajectories of the entrance wounds to the back - including two exit wounds which did not have corresponding defects in the floor - as would be expected if the decedent were in this position when shot execution-style. Following the presentation of our report of findings to the prosecution, the (now retired) lead detective was asked to respond and issue a new report. He didn't.
With two postponements of trial, and no offer made by prosecution, on the eve of a firm trial date the prosecution offered a plea to 2nd degree murder. We were advised by the defense team our expertise and findings were instrumental to the outcome in the best interests of the defendant.
Our agency was retained by the defendant's attorney to assist in the criminal defense of fatal shooting. The defendant was charged with first-degree homicide in 2019. The lead law enforcement detective testified before a grand jury, less than two weeks post-event, the defendant executed the decedent with four gunshot wounds to back as he lay unconscious on the floor; he had no findings for why the decedent was unconscious. He further testified he had not attended the autopsy or read the report, available before and at his testimony. When a grand jury member presented the question of what evidence there was of an execution-style murder, the detective's testimony was the grouping and trajectory of the four gunshot wounds to the back and head.
In reviewing the evidence, including reports and photographs to assist with the gunshot wound entrances and exits with trajectory, and in developing location of the handgun (owned by the decedent), it was determined the decedent first brandished his handgun threatening the defendant. A struggle followed with the defendant having control of the handgun and the decedent blocking the only means of escape. In fear for his life, the defendant first fired and struck the decedent in the abdomen, then as further struggle followed, shot three more times as he fled the scene, striking the decedent in the back before he fell to the floor. This was evidence by a entrance wound of the abdomen not disclosed in the grand jury testimony, as well as the differing trajectories of the entrance wounds to the back - including two exit wounds which did not have corresponding defects in the floor - as would be expected if the decedent were in this position when shot execution-style. Following the presentation of our report of findings to the prosecution, the (now retired) lead detective was asked to respond and issue a new report. He didn't.
With two postponements of trial, and no offer made by prosecution, on the eve of a firm trial date the prosecution offered a plea to 2nd degree murder. We were advised by the defense team our expertise and findings were instrumental to the outcome in the best interests of the defendant.
Injured Party Listed as At Fault & Victim in Motor Vehicle Collision (Legal Investigation)
Our agency was retained by a plaintiff’s attorney representing an injured party from a motor vehicle collision. The attorney’s client was cut off by the adverse driver and forced a sudden stop resulting in rear-ending the adverse driver; and resulting in serious injuries and extensive vehicle damage – the adverse driver was not hurt and had minimal damage. Law enforcement investigated and cited the adverse driver as at fault, including admission on scene, and pleading guilty at court. However, the insurance company denied liability because 1) it was a rear-end collision and they determined the injured driver was following too close; and 2) the Traffic Accident Report (TAR) did not list their insured as at fault – or identified at all in the report.
During the official investigation statements taken of both drivers, and one 911 caller witnessing the collision. Also on scene, and having witnessed the collision, was an off-duty detective from the same department. These statements also were not in the TAR. A third issue was also from the TAR – reporting the injured driver was in the inside lane.
Review and analysis of the official records, reports and photographs determined the impact was not in the inside lane, and also showed evidence of the adverse driver cutting across from the outside lane and left skid marks and debris when suddenly stopping. Bodycam video from the investigating officer was also reviewed, which had the telephone interview of the 911 caller, as well as the interviews of both drivers, and full scene video. Damage to the adverse driver’s vehicle also had corresponding damage to his direction of travel across from right to left.
The investigative findings were reported to the insurance company, who reached a settlement of liability with the injured driver.
Our agency was retained by a plaintiff’s attorney representing an injured party from a motor vehicle collision. The attorney’s client was cut off by the adverse driver and forced a sudden stop resulting in rear-ending the adverse driver; and resulting in serious injuries and extensive vehicle damage – the adverse driver was not hurt and had minimal damage. Law enforcement investigated and cited the adverse driver as at fault, including admission on scene, and pleading guilty at court. However, the insurance company denied liability because 1) it was a rear-end collision and they determined the injured driver was following too close; and 2) the Traffic Accident Report (TAR) did not list their insured as at fault – or identified at all in the report.
During the official investigation statements taken of both drivers, and one 911 caller witnessing the collision. Also on scene, and having witnessed the collision, was an off-duty detective from the same department. These statements also were not in the TAR. A third issue was also from the TAR – reporting the injured driver was in the inside lane.
Review and analysis of the official records, reports and photographs determined the impact was not in the inside lane, and also showed evidence of the adverse driver cutting across from the outside lane and left skid marks and debris when suddenly stopping. Bodycam video from the investigating officer was also reviewed, which had the telephone interview of the 911 caller, as well as the interviews of both drivers, and full scene video. Damage to the adverse driver’s vehicle also had corresponding damage to his direction of travel across from right to left.
The investigative findings were reported to the insurance company, who reached a settlement of liability with the injured driver.
Lone Defendant Charged in Multiple-Stabbing Murder (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by the defense team in a pre-meditated homicide of multiple stabbings to a decedent. One defendant was charged. The stabbing was outside in an area not easily seen by others, and no reported witnesses. The decedent had several dozen stab wounds to the head, face, neck, torso, and back. Security camera video showed the defendant with two other persons, and in other frames the decedent, several minutes before the estimated time of the event. The decedent was rumored to be an unconvicted pedophile, with no arrest or law enforcement contact history. All other persons were local without a permanent residence and were ‘couch squatters’.
During the official investigation of several weeks, informants reported a suspect – the defendant, and a knife where he had stayed. The knife was recovered, a single-blade folding knife with a thumb-stud and other accessories – small LED flashlight, ferro rod (fire starter) and unique single-edge blade characteristics. It was a very common knife and style, manufactured and sold under several brands and available variously in convenient stores, department stores, sporting goods stores, and gun shows.
Review and analysis of the official records, reports and photographs determined the knife was not likely consistent with artifacts of injuries to the decedent – no artifacts of any unique characteristics of the knife were found. Additional conclusions determined there were at least two sharp-edged instruments used, consistent with a single-edge knife, and a double-edged knife, as well as one injury to a leg consistent with a flathead screwdriver or similar. This information was also consistent with more than one person being involved. Additional information presented later by report from the defense was the defendant had told another, on a recorded conversation, they had the right person but wrong knife.
Expert testimony included the above and additional facts, conclusions and opinions. No other persons were contacted, arrested or charged – or testified; and no incident witnesses testified. The defendant was found guilty. In remarks, the judge noted the evidence strongly suggested other defendants and questioned why no others were charged – none were ever charged or investigated.
Our agency was retained by the defense team in a pre-meditated homicide of multiple stabbings to a decedent. One defendant was charged. The stabbing was outside in an area not easily seen by others, and no reported witnesses. The decedent had several dozen stab wounds to the head, face, neck, torso, and back. Security camera video showed the defendant with two other persons, and in other frames the decedent, several minutes before the estimated time of the event. The decedent was rumored to be an unconvicted pedophile, with no arrest or law enforcement contact history. All other persons were local without a permanent residence and were ‘couch squatters’.
During the official investigation of several weeks, informants reported a suspect – the defendant, and a knife where he had stayed. The knife was recovered, a single-blade folding knife with a thumb-stud and other accessories – small LED flashlight, ferro rod (fire starter) and unique single-edge blade characteristics. It was a very common knife and style, manufactured and sold under several brands and available variously in convenient stores, department stores, sporting goods stores, and gun shows.
Review and analysis of the official records, reports and photographs determined the knife was not likely consistent with artifacts of injuries to the decedent – no artifacts of any unique characteristics of the knife were found. Additional conclusions determined there were at least two sharp-edged instruments used, consistent with a single-edge knife, and a double-edged knife, as well as one injury to a leg consistent with a flathead screwdriver or similar. This information was also consistent with more than one person being involved. Additional information presented later by report from the defense was the defendant had told another, on a recorded conversation, they had the right person but wrong knife.
Expert testimony included the above and additional facts, conclusions and opinions. No other persons were contacted, arrested or charged – or testified; and no incident witnesses testified. The defendant was found guilty. In remarks, the judge noted the evidence strongly suggested other defendants and questioned why no others were charged – none were ever charged or investigated.
Multiple Juveniles Charged in Homosexual Survivalist's Murder (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by the attorney representing the decedent’s family in a civil wrongful death; there was a concurrent criminal homicide. The juveniles reported going to the decedent’s junkyard several times after school and on weekends. They reported it was well known he was homosexual for younger boys in the community. On the occasion of the event, they were invited to his ‘survivalist bunker’. In this bunker he provided alcohol and marijuana, as well as watch homosexual pornography. During their time in the bunker, the decedent made sexual advances towards one or more of the juveniles. In the course of the physical altercation, they each grabbed a semi-automatic rifle and shot the decedent multiple times as he came at them, killing him.
The private investigator conducted the scene investigation and provided photographs and reports of the incident for review. In review of the scene investigation, including by law enforcement, and with the autopsy reports and photographs, it was determined the trajectory of the gunshot wounds came from at least two different locations – one to the right of the decedent, and one directly behind, and both were below the decedent – going from his lower back and right torso flank towards the front and chest. Anatomically – from back to front, upward at a sharp angle, and one from right to left and the other without much side-to-side deviation. This information determined the decedent was not moving towards the juveniles, but away. Next it was determined he was climbing up the ladder to exit the bunker – the only manner of ingress and egress. Additional information from the private investigator determined the decedent was a homosexual with a live-in partner of 20 years until recent to the incident. In addition, there was no criminal history or any report of criminal activity – including as a suspected pedophile or sexual assailant. The decedent was well known in the community, including his homosexuality, with no indications of moral turpitude. Law enforcement found no pornographic material in the bunker; they did find material in the decedent’s house – the juveniles stated they had never been in the house. In the bunker was found alcohol and marijuana. At autopsy the decedent was negative, and the juveniles were never tested.
The civil case was settled, and the juveniles were either convicted or reached a plea agreement.
Our agency was retained by the attorney representing the decedent’s family in a civil wrongful death; there was a concurrent criminal homicide. The juveniles reported going to the decedent’s junkyard several times after school and on weekends. They reported it was well known he was homosexual for younger boys in the community. On the occasion of the event, they were invited to his ‘survivalist bunker’. In this bunker he provided alcohol and marijuana, as well as watch homosexual pornography. During their time in the bunker, the decedent made sexual advances towards one or more of the juveniles. In the course of the physical altercation, they each grabbed a semi-automatic rifle and shot the decedent multiple times as he came at them, killing him.
The private investigator conducted the scene investigation and provided photographs and reports of the incident for review. In review of the scene investigation, including by law enforcement, and with the autopsy reports and photographs, it was determined the trajectory of the gunshot wounds came from at least two different locations – one to the right of the decedent, and one directly behind, and both were below the decedent – going from his lower back and right torso flank towards the front and chest. Anatomically – from back to front, upward at a sharp angle, and one from right to left and the other without much side-to-side deviation. This information determined the decedent was not moving towards the juveniles, but away. Next it was determined he was climbing up the ladder to exit the bunker – the only manner of ingress and egress. Additional information from the private investigator determined the decedent was a homosexual with a live-in partner of 20 years until recent to the incident. In addition, there was no criminal history or any report of criminal activity – including as a suspected pedophile or sexual assailant. The decedent was well known in the community, including his homosexuality, with no indications of moral turpitude. Law enforcement found no pornographic material in the bunker; they did find material in the decedent’s house – the juveniles stated they had never been in the house. In the bunker was found alcohol and marijuana. At autopsy the decedent was negative, and the juveniles were never tested.
The civil case was settled, and the juveniles were either convicted or reached a plea agreement.
Client Poisoned by Dental Professional (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by an individual who stated they were poisoned while at a dental appointment as a matter of a corporate contract murder over intellectual property. The client was pursuing both civil remedies and criminal charges. The circumstances were unusual and plausible as reported.
The client stated being poisoned with a high volume of fluoride at a dental appointment. The client had been a long-term patient, and had requested no use of fluoride during any treatments. The next day the client had rust colored urine, froze the urine, and sent to a laboratory for testing. The symptoms spanned several days, and no medical consultation, diagnosis or treatment was made. The client did previously consult with a forensic pathologist, by phone, and provided a partial transcript of the conversation – no consultation was made, citing caseload. In the conversation, the forensic pathologist stated the client was lucky to be alive after being told of the toxicology levels indicating fluoride poisoning. However, conversation continued with the forensic pathologist stating he was not an expert and could not help. The ‘lucky to be alive’ has no context, and in follow-up was determined to be a general statement to the results.
We consulted additional forensic experts, who were concerned with an unknown source for the urine sample and the uncommon knowledge to test for fluoride requires an immediately frozen sample (this was not known to us – emphasizing the importance of additional expert consultations). Therefore, the laboratory tests could be misleading. Further, an additional expert calculated the laboratory findings to the specimen information submitted and found discrepancies leading to a conclusion the urine had not metabolized prior to collection, and the levels would otherwise be within normal ranges. We then consulted with the testing laboratory, and was informed the tests are done as directed on specimens provided – they cannot verify collection methods or chain of custody prior to their own receipt and process. Further, the levels determined would have been fatal many times and had not been seen before.
In communicating with the client, we issued a letter of our findings and opinion. We further advised that our conclusive findings in a written report could be used against the client in any judicial proceeding, and result in extensive time and costs for which we would not be indemnified. We therefore declined to issue a report detailing our conclusions as to if the client were poisoned, or how the urine specimen was collected, frozen and tested resulting in a ‘record level’ of fluoride which should have been fatal.
As part of our findings, we concluded, “… the information and evidence does not conclusively support a specific source or introduction…” Two years after this consultation, the client was charged and convicted related to the claims.
Our agency was retained by an individual who stated they were poisoned while at a dental appointment as a matter of a corporate contract murder over intellectual property. The client was pursuing both civil remedies and criminal charges. The circumstances were unusual and plausible as reported.
The client stated being poisoned with a high volume of fluoride at a dental appointment. The client had been a long-term patient, and had requested no use of fluoride during any treatments. The next day the client had rust colored urine, froze the urine, and sent to a laboratory for testing. The symptoms spanned several days, and no medical consultation, diagnosis or treatment was made. The client did previously consult with a forensic pathologist, by phone, and provided a partial transcript of the conversation – no consultation was made, citing caseload. In the conversation, the forensic pathologist stated the client was lucky to be alive after being told of the toxicology levels indicating fluoride poisoning. However, conversation continued with the forensic pathologist stating he was not an expert and could not help. The ‘lucky to be alive’ has no context, and in follow-up was determined to be a general statement to the results.
We consulted additional forensic experts, who were concerned with an unknown source for the urine sample and the uncommon knowledge to test for fluoride requires an immediately frozen sample (this was not known to us – emphasizing the importance of additional expert consultations). Therefore, the laboratory tests could be misleading. Further, an additional expert calculated the laboratory findings to the specimen information submitted and found discrepancies leading to a conclusion the urine had not metabolized prior to collection, and the levels would otherwise be within normal ranges. We then consulted with the testing laboratory, and was informed the tests are done as directed on specimens provided – they cannot verify collection methods or chain of custody prior to their own receipt and process. Further, the levels determined would have been fatal many times and had not been seen before.
In communicating with the client, we issued a letter of our findings and opinion. We further advised that our conclusive findings in a written report could be used against the client in any judicial proceeding, and result in extensive time and costs for which we would not be indemnified. We therefore declined to issue a report detailing our conclusions as to if the client were poisoned, or how the urine specimen was collected, frozen and tested resulting in a ‘record level’ of fluoride which should have been fatal.
As part of our findings, we concluded, “… the information and evidence does not conclusively support a specific source or introduction…” Two years after this consultation, the client was charged and convicted related to the claims.
Over $1 Million in Life Insurance Benefits - Denied and Won on Appeal - No Decedent Negligence!
(Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained to obtain records, reports, photographs, and records from the official investigating agencies, and provide an expert case review and consultation for to file an appeal direct to the insurance company to appeal their decision denying benefits to the widow.
The decedent was found at home after having bled to death from a hand injury. The claim was denied based on the insurance company review of only the autopsy report, and making a determination the decedent was negligent due to alcohol intoxication.
The findings from the forensic autopsy were originally Suicide and Cause of Death due to stab / incised wounds of the right hand, and intoxicated. The Manner of Death was changed from Suicide to Accident before the claim was filed and denied.
There were serious issues with the investigation and evidence - first of which the insurance company did not request or review any scene or autopsy photographs, or any law enforcement reports. They did not interview the widow, who was the beneficiary.
We completed our requests, then independently reviewed these materials and submitted our report. The insurance denial theory included due to specific exclusionary actions on the part of the decedent. In their findings, we concluded, in part, “The decedent’s death was an Accident due to a domestic mishap of accidental trauma from a stab wound to the right hand, incising the ulnar artery, resulting in hypovolemic shock and exsanguination. Specifically, a single incised wound of the right palm heel, incising the ulnar artery. The first bloodletting from this injury was at the kitchen sink and immediate counter area.” and “There were no findings at autopsy or scene investigation indicating the decedent was involved or engaged in any at risk, dangerous, illicit, or unusual behavior and activity.”
Following submission of the appeal with report, the insurance company referred their findings to an expert forensic pathologist. A few weeks later, the insurer reversed its denial decision and agreed to pay full benefits exceeding $1 million. As noted by the attorney, our "...expert protocols, analysis, and review saved us valuable time and resulted in a great outcome for our client. Our appeal was heavily dependent on the expert research, review, analysis and report of the Beers, as experts in the field of medicolegal investigation and analysis."
Learn what our client had to say about this case - Interpleader Law Recommendation Letter 05-05-2020
(Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained to obtain records, reports, photographs, and records from the official investigating agencies, and provide an expert case review and consultation for to file an appeal direct to the insurance company to appeal their decision denying benefits to the widow.
The decedent was found at home after having bled to death from a hand injury. The claim was denied based on the insurance company review of only the autopsy report, and making a determination the decedent was negligent due to alcohol intoxication.
The findings from the forensic autopsy were originally Suicide and Cause of Death due to stab / incised wounds of the right hand, and intoxicated. The Manner of Death was changed from Suicide to Accident before the claim was filed and denied.
There were serious issues with the investigation and evidence - first of which the insurance company did not request or review any scene or autopsy photographs, or any law enforcement reports. They did not interview the widow, who was the beneficiary.
We completed our requests, then independently reviewed these materials and submitted our report. The insurance denial theory included due to specific exclusionary actions on the part of the decedent. In their findings, we concluded, in part, “The decedent’s death was an Accident due to a domestic mishap of accidental trauma from a stab wound to the right hand, incising the ulnar artery, resulting in hypovolemic shock and exsanguination. Specifically, a single incised wound of the right palm heel, incising the ulnar artery. The first bloodletting from this injury was at the kitchen sink and immediate counter area.” and “There were no findings at autopsy or scene investigation indicating the decedent was involved or engaged in any at risk, dangerous, illicit, or unusual behavior and activity.”
Following submission of the appeal with report, the insurance company referred their findings to an expert forensic pathologist. A few weeks later, the insurer reversed its denial decision and agreed to pay full benefits exceeding $1 million. As noted by the attorney, our "...expert protocols, analysis, and review saved us valuable time and resulted in a great outcome for our client. Our appeal was heavily dependent on the expert research, review, analysis and report of the Beers, as experts in the field of medicolegal investigation and analysis."
Learn what our client had to say about this case - Interpleader Law Recommendation Letter 05-05-2020
Unusual Rural Gunshot Death - Homicide or Suicide? (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by family members with notable concerns of the official investigations, and finding of suicide, in the death of a relative. The circumstances themselves were unusual – alone in his truck, in a very remote area, and only a rifle found by the responding deputy – in the backseat and muzzle towards the decedent in the driver’s seat. The rifle was sitting on top of a pile of personal effects, and the entire truck – including truck bed – was filled with belongings, except for the driver’s seat where the decedent was. He had a gunshot wound in the left chest – at an angle not consistent with the trajectory of the rifle. The family was told by the responding deputy this was because after the decedent shot himself while driving his truck, he went off the road and hit a utility pole, causing the rifle to go over the decedent and to the back seat.
None of this made any sense to the family. They provided all the records, reports and photographs provided to them by the Coroner’s Office and Sheriff’s Office. In reviewing this initial information, we found several unusual circumstances – and agreed with the family concerns. However, we also found several discrepancies, failure to follow standard and protocols; and indications of missing records, reports, and photographs. We made official requests and began receiving more information – which had ‘inadvertently not been previously found’. We reviewed this second set of materials – and yet still found missing materials. We made a third request and received more materials – but not everything; we learned some photographs taken with a personal cell phone (referenced in a report) were lost forever. We found additional information on bodycam video and audio – including statements from the responding deputy to others on scene as to how the rifle used in the suicide went from the in front of the decedent to the back seat.
After reviewing all of the available materials, it all came together. There were significant questions answered, and evidence found. Our findings included the official investigations by both the Sheriff’s Office and Coroner’s Office had some deficiencies; and the official findings are consistent with the facts and evidence – evidence they did not find or report, but was documented in photographs, video and audio. There is no evidence of suspicious circumstances, or evidence of foul play, in this death. The evidence indicates and supports a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The official finding of suicide was supported by the evidence. During this family consultation, we could not help but ask – what if this were a homicide? What if it were not, but someone was arrested, charged – even convicted?
This is one of many expert consultations we have found where uncovering undisclosed evidence answers the lingering questions. There may not be a change in the outcome. The family has answers, and no one is falsely accused of murder.
Our agency was retained by family members with notable concerns of the official investigations, and finding of suicide, in the death of a relative. The circumstances themselves were unusual – alone in his truck, in a very remote area, and only a rifle found by the responding deputy – in the backseat and muzzle towards the decedent in the driver’s seat. The rifle was sitting on top of a pile of personal effects, and the entire truck – including truck bed – was filled with belongings, except for the driver’s seat where the decedent was. He had a gunshot wound in the left chest – at an angle not consistent with the trajectory of the rifle. The family was told by the responding deputy this was because after the decedent shot himself while driving his truck, he went off the road and hit a utility pole, causing the rifle to go over the decedent and to the back seat.
None of this made any sense to the family. They provided all the records, reports and photographs provided to them by the Coroner’s Office and Sheriff’s Office. In reviewing this initial information, we found several unusual circumstances – and agreed with the family concerns. However, we also found several discrepancies, failure to follow standard and protocols; and indications of missing records, reports, and photographs. We made official requests and began receiving more information – which had ‘inadvertently not been previously found’. We reviewed this second set of materials – and yet still found missing materials. We made a third request and received more materials – but not everything; we learned some photographs taken with a personal cell phone (referenced in a report) were lost forever. We found additional information on bodycam video and audio – including statements from the responding deputy to others on scene as to how the rifle used in the suicide went from the in front of the decedent to the back seat.
After reviewing all of the available materials, it all came together. There were significant questions answered, and evidence found. Our findings included the official investigations by both the Sheriff’s Office and Coroner’s Office had some deficiencies; and the official findings are consistent with the facts and evidence – evidence they did not find or report, but was documented in photographs, video and audio. There is no evidence of suspicious circumstances, or evidence of foul play, in this death. The evidence indicates and supports a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The official finding of suicide was supported by the evidence. During this family consultation, we could not help but ask – what if this were a homicide? What if it were not, but someone was arrested, charged – even convicted?
This is one of many expert consultations we have found where uncovering undisclosed evidence answers the lingering questions. There may not be a change in the outcome. The family has answers, and no one is falsely accused of murder.
Individual Background / Assets & Liabilities investigation and over $500K fraud recovery! (Legal Investigation)
One of our Probate / Public Administrator clients was appointed by the Court to protect the interests of an elderly gentleman suspected of being victimized by a live-in caretaker. The caretaker had official documents of real property and water rights transfers (the latter being very valuable in the Colorado agricultural county), as well as bank accounts and other assets. In addition, she was identifying herself as his spouse.
The client provided personal identifying information, family members, and former names, as well as states suspected of having other personal and business interests. First conducting an address history, we identified multiple states to research. In the course of the research, we found two states with real property and business interests, as well as an existing marriage already suspected. We also found transactions transferring real property from joint ownership to only her husband in her primary state. This was dated the same day she received a real property transfer from the client’s protected person to her.
At a hearing, the subject was questioned under oath and several facts of our multi-page report and over 50 pages of primary source documentation was presented (note – database information is not acceptable in courts, nor are they wholly reliable). Following a few hours of testimony, the judge had additional questions and held the hearing over to the next day. Under further questioning and testimony, the subject was advised of the consequences for perjury and an immediate settlement conference between the parties ordered.
It was agreed to return all titles and claims to the client, as well as all available monies and assets. This included voluntary return of funds, transferred as gifts, to the subject’s children. Unfortunately, there remains in excess of $100,000 unaccounted for.
One of our Probate / Public Administrator clients was appointed by the Court to protect the interests of an elderly gentleman suspected of being victimized by a live-in caretaker. The caretaker had official documents of real property and water rights transfers (the latter being very valuable in the Colorado agricultural county), as well as bank accounts and other assets. In addition, she was identifying herself as his spouse.
The client provided personal identifying information, family members, and former names, as well as states suspected of having other personal and business interests. First conducting an address history, we identified multiple states to research. In the course of the research, we found two states with real property and business interests, as well as an existing marriage already suspected. We also found transactions transferring real property from joint ownership to only her husband in her primary state. This was dated the same day she received a real property transfer from the client’s protected person to her.
At a hearing, the subject was questioned under oath and several facts of our multi-page report and over 50 pages of primary source documentation was presented (note – database information is not acceptable in courts, nor are they wholly reliable). Following a few hours of testimony, the judge had additional questions and held the hearing over to the next day. Under further questioning and testimony, the subject was advised of the consequences for perjury and an immediate settlement conference between the parties ordered.
It was agreed to return all titles and claims to the client, as well as all available monies and assets. This included voluntary return of funds, transferred as gifts, to the subject’s children. Unfortunately, there remains in excess of $100,000 unaccounted for.
Dismissal of Homicide Charges - because death was a suicide! (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained to provide expert case review and consultation for an indigent homicide criminal defense, the charges included 2nd Degree Homicide. The decedent lived alone and was found on his bedroom floor with multiple stab and slashing wounds to the neck. The decedent was found by siblings, who had to remove a front door window pane to unlock and enter the apartment.
The findings from the forensic autopsy were Cause of Death by the multiple stab and incised wounds to the neck, including several ‘hesitation’ marks consistent with the decedent’s dominant hand usage. The toxicology was negative. The Manner of Death was Undetermined, as there was evidence of Homicide or Suicide and insufficient findings for either.
There were serious issues with the investigation and evidence - which supported suicide, and no other involved persons or any assault. Other than the bedroom, no blood was found in the apartment – and the bloodspatter evidence showed no other persons were near or approximate to the decedent at the time of his death. After the scene was released, the decedent’s siblings were allowed into the apartment. At a later time, they turned a purse into a small town marshall several miles from the small city police department they knew was investigating the death. Inside the purse, identified as the defendant’s was found a hair brush – with hair and blood. Testing showed the blood DNA was the decedent’s, and the hair DNA was the defendant’s. This was the only evidence connecting the scene, decedent, and defendant. The knife, on the bed, had only blood and DNA from the decedent.
The defendant was contacted and stated she had been with the decedent for about a week and had stolen the car, then abandoned it on a highway after running out of gas. She had told the decedent she was going to the liquor store and never returned – and did not take her purse, only her two cell phones. The cell phone tracking supported the defendant’s statements of activities before, during, and after being with the defendant. The Manner of Death had been changed to Homicide, additional suspects were also questioned and cleared; the defendant was arrested and charged.
The law enforcement investigation also found the decedent had a history of alcohol and other drug abuse, and had been hospitalized just days before – and historically – for suicidal ideations. Following the last discharge, the decedent had also made hallucinatory 911 calls of people outside the apartment and making active threats.
About one year following arrest, the trial was scheduled to start in late March. One week before trial, the prosecutor quietly filed a motion to dismiss – without even telling the defense attorneys. This dismissal was a result of the defense providing our findings, and the prosecution's interview of another defense expert – this death was a suicide, and not a homicide.
We know and respect the other expert well; however, we did not know of their involvement - as we are never told about other consulting experts. In sharing the news of the dismissal, our clients told us how important and appreciated it was for them to tell them the truth - good and bad - and, although unknown to each other, reached the same conclusions.
There are several nuances to this (evidence, chain of custody, etc.), which would have been raised at trial. Most important, this death was not a homicide - and that's why it was finally dismissed. It is one potentially wrongful conviction which did not happen. We simply do not see that very often.
Learn what our client had to say about this case - Colorado Public Defender Recommendation Letter 04-17-2019
Our agency was retained to provide expert case review and consultation for an indigent homicide criminal defense, the charges included 2nd Degree Homicide. The decedent lived alone and was found on his bedroom floor with multiple stab and slashing wounds to the neck. The decedent was found by siblings, who had to remove a front door window pane to unlock and enter the apartment.
The findings from the forensic autopsy were Cause of Death by the multiple stab and incised wounds to the neck, including several ‘hesitation’ marks consistent with the decedent’s dominant hand usage. The toxicology was negative. The Manner of Death was Undetermined, as there was evidence of Homicide or Suicide and insufficient findings for either.
There were serious issues with the investigation and evidence - which supported suicide, and no other involved persons or any assault. Other than the bedroom, no blood was found in the apartment – and the bloodspatter evidence showed no other persons were near or approximate to the decedent at the time of his death. After the scene was released, the decedent’s siblings were allowed into the apartment. At a later time, they turned a purse into a small town marshall several miles from the small city police department they knew was investigating the death. Inside the purse, identified as the defendant’s was found a hair brush – with hair and blood. Testing showed the blood DNA was the decedent’s, and the hair DNA was the defendant’s. This was the only evidence connecting the scene, decedent, and defendant. The knife, on the bed, had only blood and DNA from the decedent.
The defendant was contacted and stated she had been with the decedent for about a week and had stolen the car, then abandoned it on a highway after running out of gas. She had told the decedent she was going to the liquor store and never returned – and did not take her purse, only her two cell phones. The cell phone tracking supported the defendant’s statements of activities before, during, and after being with the defendant. The Manner of Death had been changed to Homicide, additional suspects were also questioned and cleared; the defendant was arrested and charged.
The law enforcement investigation also found the decedent had a history of alcohol and other drug abuse, and had been hospitalized just days before – and historically – for suicidal ideations. Following the last discharge, the decedent had also made hallucinatory 911 calls of people outside the apartment and making active threats.
About one year following arrest, the trial was scheduled to start in late March. One week before trial, the prosecutor quietly filed a motion to dismiss – without even telling the defense attorneys. This dismissal was a result of the defense providing our findings, and the prosecution's interview of another defense expert – this death was a suicide, and not a homicide.
We know and respect the other expert well; however, we did not know of their involvement - as we are never told about other consulting experts. In sharing the news of the dismissal, our clients told us how important and appreciated it was for them to tell them the truth - good and bad - and, although unknown to each other, reached the same conclusions.
There are several nuances to this (evidence, chain of custody, etc.), which would have been raised at trial. Most important, this death was not a homicide - and that's why it was finally dismissed. It is one potentially wrongful conviction which did not happen. We simply do not see that very often.
Learn what our client had to say about this case - Colorado Public Defender Recommendation Letter 04-17-2019
Motor Vehicle Collision (Legal Investigation)
In October 2018 our agency was retained by the driver a vehicle struck by an oncoming pickup truck at municipal intersection controlled by traffic signals at all directions and left-turn lanes. The client was cited by the local police agency with failure to yield to oncoming traffic. The adverse driver was cited for failing to stop at a red light.
The client’s statement was that she driving westbound and stopped at a green light in the left-turn lane. When oncoming traffic was clear, she proceeded on a yellow light and was then struck about ¾ into completing her turn. She was not aware of the collision impact until after coming to a rest. She was transported by ambulance to the local hospital and contacted in the Emergency Room by the investigating police officer, where she was cited and informed the adverse driver was also cited. It should be noted, the citation was completed before the investigating officer contacted the client.
During the claim process, the adverse insurance determined fault was 50/50 and denied any claim, including the client’s vehicle, which was determined a total loss. We requested the usual official records, reports and 911 calls (no scene photographs were taken) for review. Our investigation uncovered several issues and discrepancies with the investigation. In fact, after review of the Traffic Accident Report, issued citations, and CAD, the investigating officer was inconsistent in his decision-making process and made three differing accounts of the same event.
In Colorado law, for left-turn car collisions, there is a presumption of fault to the turning driver. There is an exception to the “no fault” provision of a left-turn car accident which includes when the car traveling straight was traveling way over the speed limit or ran a red light [emphasis added].
After the presentation of our findings to the client’s insurance, it was determined the adverse driver was 100% at fault. Further, the adverse driver did not appear in municipal court for his summons and did not pay the assessed fine; this has resulted in a bench warrant for his arrest.
Additional legal remedies for personal injury and damages are continuing.
In October 2018 our agency was retained by the driver a vehicle struck by an oncoming pickup truck at municipal intersection controlled by traffic signals at all directions and left-turn lanes. The client was cited by the local police agency with failure to yield to oncoming traffic. The adverse driver was cited for failing to stop at a red light.
The client’s statement was that she driving westbound and stopped at a green light in the left-turn lane. When oncoming traffic was clear, she proceeded on a yellow light and was then struck about ¾ into completing her turn. She was not aware of the collision impact until after coming to a rest. She was transported by ambulance to the local hospital and contacted in the Emergency Room by the investigating police officer, where she was cited and informed the adverse driver was also cited. It should be noted, the citation was completed before the investigating officer contacted the client.
During the claim process, the adverse insurance determined fault was 50/50 and denied any claim, including the client’s vehicle, which was determined a total loss. We requested the usual official records, reports and 911 calls (no scene photographs were taken) for review. Our investigation uncovered several issues and discrepancies with the investigation. In fact, after review of the Traffic Accident Report, issued citations, and CAD, the investigating officer was inconsistent in his decision-making process and made three differing accounts of the same event.
In Colorado law, for left-turn car collisions, there is a presumption of fault to the turning driver. There is an exception to the “no fault” provision of a left-turn car accident which includes when the car traveling straight was traveling way over the speed limit or ran a red light [emphasis added].
After the presentation of our findings to the client’s insurance, it was determined the adverse driver was 100% at fault. Further, the adverse driver did not appear in municipal court for his summons and did not pay the assessed fine; this has resulted in a bench warrant for his arrest.
Additional legal remedies for personal injury and damages are continuing.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation) - Updated 06/10/2013, 08/12/2017 and 09/04/2020 - 10 Years to settle all denied insurance claims in favor of the widow
Our agency was retained by a private investigator on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent, a law enforcement officer, was found by officers of an overlapping jurisdiction. The official investigation was conducted by the decedent’s employing agency, who had jurisdiction. Extensive photographs, records and reports were provided for review, including multiple re-enactment videos and photographs from experts retained by the law enforcement agency and family.
Review of the provided photographs, records and reports provided several concerns, beginning with the perfect and symmetrical position in which the decedent was found (supine) with his shotgun. The decedent had one injury, which was immediately fatal, as a result of a contact penetrating shotgun slug wound entering under the chin and traversing to exit the top of the head. There were multiple discernible wounds unanswered by the conclusion of suicide. Specifically, in the act of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, there is no plausible explanation for the injuries and pressure patterns to the respective dorsal and palmar surfaces of both hands. Moreover, the decedent’s uniform had indications of being involved in a physical altercation and on the ground prior to death.
Personal effects and items from his utility belt were strewn about the decedent, almost circular and at varying distances. His duty weapon was found several yards from him, over a chain-link fence topped with barbed wire. His backup weapon, on an ankle, was removed.
Investigation determined that the shotgun was not in a final resting position consistent with having been discharged by the decedent, in any conceivable position of the decedent, and then coming to rest as found. The angle of the entrance wound, and wound path, are inconsistent with the decedent lying on the ground and his head also resting on the ground, and particularly without any consequential projectile defect to the underlying pavement.
The possibility that the decedent staged his own death as a suicide as a homicide was considered. However, the physical evidence did not support this in even the most minimal possibility.
The expert reconstruction, conducted by a former employee of the investigating agency, only concentrated on the final resting position of the decedent. This was deficient and inconclusive based upon the physical evidence. Factors that were not considered in the whole included the position of the decedent at discharge, angle of the shotgun at discharge, and angle of the decedent’s head at discharge. Each possibility presented in this reconstruction was unfounded upon further study and evaluation.
It was determined that the official investigation was insufficient in the investigation of the manner of death. It was further concluded that the scene, specifically placement of the shotgun on the decedent, was staged. It is also concluded that the decedent was standing, or less likely kneeling or crouching, with the muzzle of the shotgun pressed against the underside of his chin, the shotgun being held by another unknown person, and discharged by the unknown person. The finding of suicide by self-inflicted extraoral gunshot wound is inconsistent and not plausible based upon the documented information, facts and evidence reviewed. Investigation reveals that this incident presents concern of homicide concurrent with a mutual physical confrontation.
This agency recommended that the Cause of Death remains extraoral contact gunshot wound. The Manner of Death be amended to Homicide.
UPDATE 11/08/2012 and 11/15/2012 - this case has been published by investigative reporter, now private investigator, Paul Rubin:
Sean Drenth was police officer with Phoenix AZ police department. He was found with a single fatal shotgun wound under his chin. It was ruled a suicide after a long wait for the family, and an investigation that did not answer many questions - and added more.
AFI-LLC is one of many resources working this case. We are hoping there is justice and closure for the family. It is a story worth reading (Part 1) - https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-curious-death-of-sergeant-sean-drenth-6456218
If you read Part 1 of the death of Sean Drenth, a Phoenix police officer found dead under suspicious circumstances, here is Part 2 - https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/inside-drenth-a-look-at-what-made-a-fallen-cop-tick-6456352
UPDATE 06/10/2013 - in the months following the above newspaper stories, the medical examiner's officer continued to refuse further review and the case was submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI concurred with the ruling of suicide, based on a psychological profile. Recently the matter was presented by the widow's attorney before the Phoenix Retirement Program, which held off hearing the appeal for nine months. Jackie Temple, the city’s interim Retirement Program administrator, said the report was persuasive to members of the board. “They presented pretty strong evidence as to why they saw that it could not be suicide,”. The decision by the board was unanimous, with one abstaining vote. Here is the recent story, http://azc.cc/A1kis
His death remains closed, as suicide, by the Phoenix Police Department.
UPDATE 08/12/2017 - in May of 2015 our agency was informed an insurance company was litigating this case to deny life insurance policy claims. As a result, this case study was removed pending litigation. Under subpoena, our expert files were turned over to opposing counsel, as required under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. From May 2015 to August 2017, our agency received no further communication. On 08/12/2017 we were notified by our attorney-client, representing Sgt. Drenth's widow, of closure in the form of law enforcement widow's pension from the City of Phoenix, collection of all life insurance policies, and having Sgt. Drenth's name added to the Phoenix Police Department Fallen Officers Memorial Wall - without any further litigation.
UPDATE 09/04/2020 - the summer of 2019 we were asked to provide an updated report specific for an appeal to the Department of Justice Public Safety Officer Benefits Board. In conjunction with other team investigators and experts, our report was included with the appeal. This resulted in the award of full widow survivor benefits on 08/31/2020.
AFI-LLC is proud to have been part of this important investigation for the family - to the living we owe respect, to the dead we owe the truth. We feel this standard has been met. Our agency played a small role, and we recognize the primary investigator, family attorney, and other forensic experts that provided a team effort to reach this outcome for the family. A special thanks to the attorney and primary investigator - Joel Robbins and Jon Colvin, CLI
Our agency was retained by a private investigator on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent, a law enforcement officer, was found by officers of an overlapping jurisdiction. The official investigation was conducted by the decedent’s employing agency, who had jurisdiction. Extensive photographs, records and reports were provided for review, including multiple re-enactment videos and photographs from experts retained by the law enforcement agency and family.
Review of the provided photographs, records and reports provided several concerns, beginning with the perfect and symmetrical position in which the decedent was found (supine) with his shotgun. The decedent had one injury, which was immediately fatal, as a result of a contact penetrating shotgun slug wound entering under the chin and traversing to exit the top of the head. There were multiple discernible wounds unanswered by the conclusion of suicide. Specifically, in the act of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, there is no plausible explanation for the injuries and pressure patterns to the respective dorsal and palmar surfaces of both hands. Moreover, the decedent’s uniform had indications of being involved in a physical altercation and on the ground prior to death.
Personal effects and items from his utility belt were strewn about the decedent, almost circular and at varying distances. His duty weapon was found several yards from him, over a chain-link fence topped with barbed wire. His backup weapon, on an ankle, was removed.
Investigation determined that the shotgun was not in a final resting position consistent with having been discharged by the decedent, in any conceivable position of the decedent, and then coming to rest as found. The angle of the entrance wound, and wound path, are inconsistent with the decedent lying on the ground and his head also resting on the ground, and particularly without any consequential projectile defect to the underlying pavement.
The possibility that the decedent staged his own death as a suicide as a homicide was considered. However, the physical evidence did not support this in even the most minimal possibility.
The expert reconstruction, conducted by a former employee of the investigating agency, only concentrated on the final resting position of the decedent. This was deficient and inconclusive based upon the physical evidence. Factors that were not considered in the whole included the position of the decedent at discharge, angle of the shotgun at discharge, and angle of the decedent’s head at discharge. Each possibility presented in this reconstruction was unfounded upon further study and evaluation.
It was determined that the official investigation was insufficient in the investigation of the manner of death. It was further concluded that the scene, specifically placement of the shotgun on the decedent, was staged. It is also concluded that the decedent was standing, or less likely kneeling or crouching, with the muzzle of the shotgun pressed against the underside of his chin, the shotgun being held by another unknown person, and discharged by the unknown person. The finding of suicide by self-inflicted extraoral gunshot wound is inconsistent and not plausible based upon the documented information, facts and evidence reviewed. Investigation reveals that this incident presents concern of homicide concurrent with a mutual physical confrontation.
This agency recommended that the Cause of Death remains extraoral contact gunshot wound. The Manner of Death be amended to Homicide.
UPDATE 11/08/2012 and 11/15/2012 - this case has been published by investigative reporter, now private investigator, Paul Rubin:
Sean Drenth was police officer with Phoenix AZ police department. He was found with a single fatal shotgun wound under his chin. It was ruled a suicide after a long wait for the family, and an investigation that did not answer many questions - and added more.
AFI-LLC is one of many resources working this case. We are hoping there is justice and closure for the family. It is a story worth reading (Part 1) - https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-curious-death-of-sergeant-sean-drenth-6456218
If you read Part 1 of the death of Sean Drenth, a Phoenix police officer found dead under suspicious circumstances, here is Part 2 - https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/inside-drenth-a-look-at-what-made-a-fallen-cop-tick-6456352
UPDATE 06/10/2013 - in the months following the above newspaper stories, the medical examiner's officer continued to refuse further review and the case was submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI concurred with the ruling of suicide, based on a psychological profile. Recently the matter was presented by the widow's attorney before the Phoenix Retirement Program, which held off hearing the appeal for nine months. Jackie Temple, the city’s interim Retirement Program administrator, said the report was persuasive to members of the board. “They presented pretty strong evidence as to why they saw that it could not be suicide,”. The decision by the board was unanimous, with one abstaining vote. Here is the recent story, http://azc.cc/A1kis
His death remains closed, as suicide, by the Phoenix Police Department.
UPDATE 08/12/2017 - in May of 2015 our agency was informed an insurance company was litigating this case to deny life insurance policy claims. As a result, this case study was removed pending litigation. Under subpoena, our expert files were turned over to opposing counsel, as required under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. From May 2015 to August 2017, our agency received no further communication. On 08/12/2017 we were notified by our attorney-client, representing Sgt. Drenth's widow, of closure in the form of law enforcement widow's pension from the City of Phoenix, collection of all life insurance policies, and having Sgt. Drenth's name added to the Phoenix Police Department Fallen Officers Memorial Wall - without any further litigation.
UPDATE 09/04/2020 - the summer of 2019 we were asked to provide an updated report specific for an appeal to the Department of Justice Public Safety Officer Benefits Board. In conjunction with other team investigators and experts, our report was included with the appeal. This resulted in the award of full widow survivor benefits on 08/31/2020.
AFI-LLC is proud to have been part of this important investigation for the family - to the living we owe respect, to the dead we owe the truth. We feel this standard has been met. Our agency played a small role, and we recognize the primary investigator, family attorney, and other forensic experts that provided a team effort to reach this outcome for the family. A special thanks to the attorney and primary investigator - Joel Robbins and Jon Colvin, CLI
False Reports of Victim to Attorney
Our agency was retained by an attorney to review the official records, reports and photographs of a reported student peer-to-peer sex assault at high school. Filed in federal court, allegations included teacher witnessed bullying, forced rape, failure to report by school authorities, failure to investigate by law enforcement, and victim self-reported inability to get pregnant due to sustained injuries from rape.
The investigation was hampered due to the successful petitioning of the school district to restrict access of law enforcement records of the official investigation. Within the witness contacts made, the assigned School Resource Officer agreed to speak with us. His interview fully contradicted the allegations of the victim and brought unreported and underreported facts to our attention. Following this disclosure, legal counsel prohibited further contact with the SRO, any school personnel and law enforcement officers.
Interviews of students, including those not disclosed by the victim, determined - as also reported by the SRO - that the
teacher witnessed bullying did not occur. A recent event of mutual fighting had recently occurred between the victim and a student she identified as bullying her. All reported circumstances were consistent with each other - but inconsistent with the reports of the victim.
There were several factual discrepancies with the report of forced rape. Available and developed information found inconsistencies with time - including the school was closed on the initial incident date reported and then changed. The allegations also included the victim was forced to smoke marijuana, her only time, with the male student prior to the rape, making her vulnerable.
The victim asserted there was a failure to comply with mandatory reporting by school authorities and a failure to investigate by law enforcement. This was determined to be false - as available records show the victim was at school for two days, following a holiday (the day the incident happened by initial report). The SRO was not at school the first day following the holiday, and the student reported the incident directly to him the first day he returned to his SRO assignment. Further, limited information released by the law enforcement agency found the investigation started with the SRO contacting the reported perpetrator by phone - as he was absent that week. The victim had factually reported this student had transferred from another school and seemed absent more often than present. The victim further reported this male student was 20 years old and was in his last year being able to attend public school. This age difference is important to possible criminal charges. It was determined in required disclosures this student was 17 years old, and only one year older than the victim.
The victim did not report to a hospital or medical facility following the rape, which she described as causing such devastating injury, she was unable to get pregnant. Social media investigation found multiple profiles for the victim, including one showing her pregnant and having several posts and updates of her pregnancy.
In providing our verbal report to the attorney-client, he was in total disbelief as to each issue we found to be false. His strongest objection was of our findings his client was pregnant. The town is small and he had known the family many years - but had not personally met his client in recent months. Following our meeting, our services were not further requested.
We learned the victim agreed to an undisclosed monetary settlement several months after our findings.
It was not our intention to determine the false allegations of the victim. However, it is our intention to find and report facts. Regardless of our attorney-client disbelieving our documented findings, we had a professional and ethical duty to report our findings. What he did - or did not - do with them is unknown to us, and often is.
Our agency was retained by an attorney to review the official records, reports and photographs of a reported student peer-to-peer sex assault at high school. Filed in federal court, allegations included teacher witnessed bullying, forced rape, failure to report by school authorities, failure to investigate by law enforcement, and victim self-reported inability to get pregnant due to sustained injuries from rape.
The investigation was hampered due to the successful petitioning of the school district to restrict access of law enforcement records of the official investigation. Within the witness contacts made, the assigned School Resource Officer agreed to speak with us. His interview fully contradicted the allegations of the victim and brought unreported and underreported facts to our attention. Following this disclosure, legal counsel prohibited further contact with the SRO, any school personnel and law enforcement officers.
Interviews of students, including those not disclosed by the victim, determined - as also reported by the SRO - that the
teacher witnessed bullying did not occur. A recent event of mutual fighting had recently occurred between the victim and a student she identified as bullying her. All reported circumstances were consistent with each other - but inconsistent with the reports of the victim.
There were several factual discrepancies with the report of forced rape. Available and developed information found inconsistencies with time - including the school was closed on the initial incident date reported and then changed. The allegations also included the victim was forced to smoke marijuana, her only time, with the male student prior to the rape, making her vulnerable.
The victim asserted there was a failure to comply with mandatory reporting by school authorities and a failure to investigate by law enforcement. This was determined to be false - as available records show the victim was at school for two days, following a holiday (the day the incident happened by initial report). The SRO was not at school the first day following the holiday, and the student reported the incident directly to him the first day he returned to his SRO assignment. Further, limited information released by the law enforcement agency found the investigation started with the SRO contacting the reported perpetrator by phone - as he was absent that week. The victim had factually reported this student had transferred from another school and seemed absent more often than present. The victim further reported this male student was 20 years old and was in his last year being able to attend public school. This age difference is important to possible criminal charges. It was determined in required disclosures this student was 17 years old, and only one year older than the victim.
The victim did not report to a hospital or medical facility following the rape, which she described as causing such devastating injury, she was unable to get pregnant. Social media investigation found multiple profiles for the victim, including one showing her pregnant and having several posts and updates of her pregnancy.
In providing our verbal report to the attorney-client, he was in total disbelief as to each issue we found to be false. His strongest objection was of our findings his client was pregnant. The town is small and he had known the family many years - but had not personally met his client in recent months. Following our meeting, our services were not further requested.
We learned the victim agreed to an undisclosed monetary settlement several months after our findings.
It was not our intention to determine the false allegations of the victim. However, it is our intention to find and report facts. Regardless of our attorney-client disbelieving our documented findings, we had a professional and ethical duty to report our findings. What he did - or did not - do with them is unknown to us, and often is.
Attempted Homicide and Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon
Our agency’s most common investigations and consultations involve death and injury causation, and analysis of the integrity of the official investigation and evidence. Two parties were involved, the resident (Defendant – occupant) and his friend (non-occupant).
The friend drove a distance to visit the defendant at his home. They were consuming alcohol and playing video games when an altercations ensued. The non-resident was stabbed with a kitchen knife in the face and chest. Although not fatal, the latter was potentially fatal. While driving himself to the hospital he called 911, and concurrently the resident also did. They each reported the altercation and injuries, but events leading to this were different.
The non-resident reported he had not consumed any alcohol and only the resident did. He further reported that the resident became upset and the altercation followed, with the resident grabbing the knife and swinging at the non-resident three times with a kitchen knife and striking him twice. The resident reported that he had not consumed any alcohol and only the non-resident did, and that it was the non-resident who became upset over the video game. He further stated it was the non-resident who found a kitchen knife and attempted to stab the resident. He was able to grab the knife and turn it on the non-resident to defend himself.
The defendant was charged with multiple felonies with a deadly weapon.
Key evidence were medical records showing intoxication and hospital detox admission of the non-occupant, law enforcement falsely reporting and grossly exaggerating the nature of the injuries, and failing to report the defendant had not been drinking. All evidence conflicted with the non-occupant and supported the defendant.
After careful review of the records, reports, and photographs, we were able to demonstrate the mishandling of evidence, overcharging and lack of charges against the reporting victim - who initiated the event.
The plea agreement dismissed the felony charges and no jail time.
As legal investigators and expert consultants, we are only concerned with the evidentiary facts. We were glad to learn that our review was instrumental in the prosecution offering a plea that was appropriate to the event and evidence for all parties.
This new and relevant information, was a material outcome in the best interests of all involved. The complex case took extensive AFI-LLC team work to review the records and reports provided in disclosure, as well as extensive research. This revealed the relevant evidence (and lack or destruction thereof) which enabled an informed decision making process. The rights and personal integrity of all involved were ultimately protected.
Our agency’s most common investigations and consultations involve death and injury causation, and analysis of the integrity of the official investigation and evidence. Two parties were involved, the resident (Defendant – occupant) and his friend (non-occupant).
The friend drove a distance to visit the defendant at his home. They were consuming alcohol and playing video games when an altercations ensued. The non-resident was stabbed with a kitchen knife in the face and chest. Although not fatal, the latter was potentially fatal. While driving himself to the hospital he called 911, and concurrently the resident also did. They each reported the altercation and injuries, but events leading to this were different.
The non-resident reported he had not consumed any alcohol and only the resident did. He further reported that the resident became upset and the altercation followed, with the resident grabbing the knife and swinging at the non-resident three times with a kitchen knife and striking him twice. The resident reported that he had not consumed any alcohol and only the non-resident did, and that it was the non-resident who became upset over the video game. He further stated it was the non-resident who found a kitchen knife and attempted to stab the resident. He was able to grab the knife and turn it on the non-resident to defend himself.
The defendant was charged with multiple felonies with a deadly weapon.
Key evidence were medical records showing intoxication and hospital detox admission of the non-occupant, law enforcement falsely reporting and grossly exaggerating the nature of the injuries, and failing to report the defendant had not been drinking. All evidence conflicted with the non-occupant and supported the defendant.
After careful review of the records, reports, and photographs, we were able to demonstrate the mishandling of evidence, overcharging and lack of charges against the reporting victim - who initiated the event.
The plea agreement dismissed the felony charges and no jail time.
As legal investigators and expert consultants, we are only concerned with the evidentiary facts. We were glad to learn that our review was instrumental in the prosecution offering a plea that was appropriate to the event and evidence for all parties.
This new and relevant information, was a material outcome in the best interests of all involved. The complex case took extensive AFI-LLC team work to review the records and reports provided in disclosure, as well as extensive research. This revealed the relevant evidence (and lack or destruction thereof) which enabled an informed decision making process. The rights and personal integrity of all involved were ultimately protected.
Alleged Binding / Restraining (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by an attorney to review the official records, reports and photographs of a reported non-assault incident of binding and restraint.
The reporting victim stated she was bound around her writs and ankles, then pulled together behind her back (hog tied) with a heavy nylon rope. The rope was missing upon arrival of law enforcement, and the one neighbor she reported to had since passed away. One patrol officer was assigned to investigate and took one picture of the bedroom in which it was reported to have occurred. The room was clean, no disarray and the bed made and undisturbed. The patrol officer also took pictures of injuries the alleged victim described to have occurred. A detective was assigned and photographs of the alleged victim's injuries were taken over a period of days. In the non-custodial interview the defendant asked the detective if he would be arrested - to which he was told he would. The interview continued for over two hours, with no evidence of wrongdoing or dishonesty as to his recollection of events. At the conclusion of the interview he was arrested.
Review of the records, reports and photographs revealed that two types of injuries existed: 1) self-inflicted abrasions only on her left wrist and both ankles; and 2) constellations of contusions of various aging on her arms and shins, which were unrelated to the alleged events as reported. Additional exculpatory evidence was not provided to defense in discovery. The law enforcement investigation was one of the worst we have reviewed. More important, we were able to demonstrate the injuries were self-inflicted and other injuries were aged contusions from previous times of intoxication.
The prosecution intended to call only the patrol officer that first responded. On the even of trial, the case was dismissed by a prosecutor thanks to our efforts of several months. From our client, "I just received a call from the prosecutor that he will be dismissing the case...Thanks for the work that you did. It helped to push the prosecutor over the edge to dismiss."
Our agency was retained by an attorney to review the official records, reports and photographs of a reported non-assault incident of binding and restraint.
The reporting victim stated she was bound around her writs and ankles, then pulled together behind her back (hog tied) with a heavy nylon rope. The rope was missing upon arrival of law enforcement, and the one neighbor she reported to had since passed away. One patrol officer was assigned to investigate and took one picture of the bedroom in which it was reported to have occurred. The room was clean, no disarray and the bed made and undisturbed. The patrol officer also took pictures of injuries the alleged victim described to have occurred. A detective was assigned and photographs of the alleged victim's injuries were taken over a period of days. In the non-custodial interview the defendant asked the detective if he would be arrested - to which he was told he would. The interview continued for over two hours, with no evidence of wrongdoing or dishonesty as to his recollection of events. At the conclusion of the interview he was arrested.
Review of the records, reports and photographs revealed that two types of injuries existed: 1) self-inflicted abrasions only on her left wrist and both ankles; and 2) constellations of contusions of various aging on her arms and shins, which were unrelated to the alleged events as reported. Additional exculpatory evidence was not provided to defense in discovery. The law enforcement investigation was one of the worst we have reviewed. More important, we were able to demonstrate the injuries were self-inflicted and other injuries were aged contusions from previous times of intoxication.
The prosecution intended to call only the patrol officer that first responded. On the even of trial, the case was dismissed by a prosecutor thanks to our efforts of several months. From our client, "I just received a call from the prosecutor that he will be dismissing the case...Thanks for the work that you did. It helped to push the prosecutor over the edge to dismiss."
Domestic Relations - Contesting Spousal Support Due to Remarriage (Expert Consultation / Investigation)
In late 2014 our agency was retained by an attorney to determine if the former spouse of their client was remarried. It was alleged that she had, and had not given notice to the client and was still collecting a significant monthly sum of spousal maintenance (alimony, support, etc.).
Through investigative databases an address history was determined and personal identifiers verified. It was also determined that a new surname was recently being used, but there was no reference to a spouse. Searches of public records determined a vehicle was purchased and registered in the new surname, approximately one year prior. Crosschecking the information determined that the persons were the same. A search of social networking profiles found a history of reporting being married in a Middle Eastern country to a non-US resident.
On 05/14/2015 Dean was offered as an expert witness to testify in the evidence motions hearing for this domestic relations matter. Through uncontested testimony, Dean connected the dots of investigative databases, public records and social networking profiles to demonstrate the former spouse was remarried at a specific time-frame. In this motions hearing, without deliberation, the judge awarded a $24,000 judgment for excess spousal support, plus attorney’s fees, costs and interest.
Our agency has regularly conducted such personal profile records checks and investigations for over 25 years, as well as authored a book and course on Individual Backgrounds, Locates and Assets & Liabilities.
In late 2014 our agency was retained by an attorney to determine if the former spouse of their client was remarried. It was alleged that she had, and had not given notice to the client and was still collecting a significant monthly sum of spousal maintenance (alimony, support, etc.).
Through investigative databases an address history was determined and personal identifiers verified. It was also determined that a new surname was recently being used, but there was no reference to a spouse. Searches of public records determined a vehicle was purchased and registered in the new surname, approximately one year prior. Crosschecking the information determined that the persons were the same. A search of social networking profiles found a history of reporting being married in a Middle Eastern country to a non-US resident.
On 05/14/2015 Dean was offered as an expert witness to testify in the evidence motions hearing for this domestic relations matter. Through uncontested testimony, Dean connected the dots of investigative databases, public records and social networking profiles to demonstrate the former spouse was remarried at a specific time-frame. In this motions hearing, without deliberation, the judge awarded a $24,000 judgment for excess spousal support, plus attorney’s fees, costs and interest.
Our agency has regularly conducted such personal profile records checks and investigations for over 25 years, as well as authored a book and course on Individual Backgrounds, Locates and Assets & Liabilities.
January 2015 - Three Complex Cases Over Several Months Closed
AFI-LLC - Working for Our Clients! A few big cases came to conclusions, and we are proud to have played important roles.
Multiple Sex Assault Charges (Criminal Defense Investigation)
Our agency was pleased to learn that an extensive criminal defense investigation, which uncovered new and relevant information, was material in the outcome in the best interests of all involved. The complex case took extensive team work to review the records and reports provided in disclosure, as well as extensive research and interviews that revealed mitigating factors, and verified reported information, which enabled an informed decision making process. The rights and personal integrity of all involved were ultimately protected.
* It should be noted that Karen's social media background investigations uncovered over 70 pages of evidence, by the reporting party, that contradicted her reported statements and also uncovered multiple similar allegations in another state that would not have been uncovered by any conventional records check.
Homicide and Aggravated Assault Charges (Expert Consultation)
Our most common investigations and consultations involve death and injury causation, and analysis of the integrity of the official investigation and evidence.
Our agency was excited to learn that another extensive criminal defense investigation has materially aided in causing the prosecution to revisit their case and request conferences with defense in the shadows of trial. Having uncovered undisclosed evidence, destroyed evidence, missing evidence, new witnesses and circumstances not disclosed by witnesses - the defense was prepared to call one key expert witness. The prosecution offered an amended charge from First Degree Murder to Second Degree Manslaughter. The prosecution was further compelled to offer the same to the co-defendant under separate legal representation.
This new and relevant information, was material an outcome in the best interests of all involved. The complex case took extensive AFI-LLC team work to review the records and reports provided in disclosure, as well as extensive research. This revealed the relevant evidence (and lack or destruction thereof) which enabled an informed decision making process. The rights and personal integrity of all involved were ultimately protected.
Domestic Relations Settlement Offer Reduced (by nearly 85%) - (Legal Investigation)
In a case that had elements of all the investigative techniques available, our agency was able to uncover material evidence that played a pivotal role in assisting our client in their domestic relations settlement. The opposing party began at $300,000 (which would have included liquidating real property and retirement assets). During the settlement conference the opposing party reached $185,000 and was countered at $50,000. Announcing they were unprepared to make any decisions, the opposing party discontinued discussions. During the course of the following two months, our agency uncovered several areas of discrepancy in the background of the opposing party. This included false disability claims (*again, Karen found video on a social media site of the opposing party dancing at a town festival, and statements of them being capable of walking over two miles without any mobility aids). Additional information included false information about their military background, financial background, unlawful transfer of assets (using our network of colleagues, one found the vehicle in a rural area based on social media information). Finally, the same efforts in the background found the the opposing party was able-bodied to work. These efforts resulted in a settlement equal to that in discussions two months prior and a preservation of assets.
AFI-LLC - Working for Our Clients! A few big cases came to conclusions, and we are proud to have played important roles.
Multiple Sex Assault Charges (Criminal Defense Investigation)
Our agency was pleased to learn that an extensive criminal defense investigation, which uncovered new and relevant information, was material in the outcome in the best interests of all involved. The complex case took extensive team work to review the records and reports provided in disclosure, as well as extensive research and interviews that revealed mitigating factors, and verified reported information, which enabled an informed decision making process. The rights and personal integrity of all involved were ultimately protected.
* It should be noted that Karen's social media background investigations uncovered over 70 pages of evidence, by the reporting party, that contradicted her reported statements and also uncovered multiple similar allegations in another state that would not have been uncovered by any conventional records check.
Homicide and Aggravated Assault Charges (Expert Consultation)
Our most common investigations and consultations involve death and injury causation, and analysis of the integrity of the official investigation and evidence.
Our agency was excited to learn that another extensive criminal defense investigation has materially aided in causing the prosecution to revisit their case and request conferences with defense in the shadows of trial. Having uncovered undisclosed evidence, destroyed evidence, missing evidence, new witnesses and circumstances not disclosed by witnesses - the defense was prepared to call one key expert witness. The prosecution offered an amended charge from First Degree Murder to Second Degree Manslaughter. The prosecution was further compelled to offer the same to the co-defendant under separate legal representation.
This new and relevant information, was material an outcome in the best interests of all involved. The complex case took extensive AFI-LLC team work to review the records and reports provided in disclosure, as well as extensive research. This revealed the relevant evidence (and lack or destruction thereof) which enabled an informed decision making process. The rights and personal integrity of all involved were ultimately protected.
Domestic Relations Settlement Offer Reduced (by nearly 85%) - (Legal Investigation)
In a case that had elements of all the investigative techniques available, our agency was able to uncover material evidence that played a pivotal role in assisting our client in their domestic relations settlement. The opposing party began at $300,000 (which would have included liquidating real property and retirement assets). During the settlement conference the opposing party reached $185,000 and was countered at $50,000. Announcing they were unprepared to make any decisions, the opposing party discontinued discussions. During the course of the following two months, our agency uncovered several areas of discrepancy in the background of the opposing party. This included false disability claims (*again, Karen found video on a social media site of the opposing party dancing at a town festival, and statements of them being capable of walking over two miles without any mobility aids). Additional information included false information about their military background, financial background, unlawful transfer of assets (using our network of colleagues, one found the vehicle in a rural area based on social media information). Finally, the same efforts in the background found the the opposing party was able-bodied to work. These efforts resulted in a settlement equal to that in discussions two months prior and a preservation of assets.
Suspicious Death - Suicide or Homicide (Independent Investigation)
Our agency was retained by next-of-kin to review the official records, reports, photographs and additional evidentiary information into the shooting death of a relative. The decedent was found inside his locked apartment, by co-workers after not reporting to work. He was lying supine with a semi-automatic handgun near his left leg, between a dining table and kitchen counter. There was no indication another person had been with him approximate to the time of his death. He resided alone and the front door was locked; however the sliding glass balcony door was unlocked (2nd level). Prior to his death he had experienced multiple life stressing experiences, including relationship breakups.
The law enforcement investigation revealed multiple investigative deficiencies, and the death was ruled a suicide. It was determined that these were mostly protocol that did not inhibit the investigation. The most significant discrepancy was failing to note or investigate the unlocked sliding door.
The evidence suggests and supports that the decedent was alone at the time of his death. Additionally, the decedent was not moved from another location or position within this location, including within the apartment. There were no indications of assault, mutual combat or defense. There is no evidence to suggest or support homicide, or that the scene and evidence were staged or altered.
This case was previously reviewed by multiple forensic experts, who concluded Undetermined as the appropriate Manner of Death. These reviewed reports did not take into account multiple key points of evidence (such as no ability for another person to have been present and positioned to act). Another example, was that perhaps the decedent mistook the handgun for his cell phone and was calling 911 (even intoxicated, as he was, the weight and manner of holding and completing a call are not the same as the operation of a semi-automatic handgun; and his cell phone was in his bedroom).
Our agency review of the empirical evidence and events concluded that the fatal shot could not have been from a person, other than the decedent, due to his location and furnishings, and final resting position. Consequential evidence, including body position and blood spatter, were consistent with the bullet trajectory (into the walls and ceiling).
Conclusively, this death was not as a consequence of homicide.
Our agency was retained by next-of-kin to review the official records, reports, photographs and additional evidentiary information into the shooting death of a relative. The decedent was found inside his locked apartment, by co-workers after not reporting to work. He was lying supine with a semi-automatic handgun near his left leg, between a dining table and kitchen counter. There was no indication another person had been with him approximate to the time of his death. He resided alone and the front door was locked; however the sliding glass balcony door was unlocked (2nd level). Prior to his death he had experienced multiple life stressing experiences, including relationship breakups.
The law enforcement investigation revealed multiple investigative deficiencies, and the death was ruled a suicide. It was determined that these were mostly protocol that did not inhibit the investigation. The most significant discrepancy was failing to note or investigate the unlocked sliding door.
The evidence suggests and supports that the decedent was alone at the time of his death. Additionally, the decedent was not moved from another location or position within this location, including within the apartment. There were no indications of assault, mutual combat or defense. There is no evidence to suggest or support homicide, or that the scene and evidence were staged or altered.
This case was previously reviewed by multiple forensic experts, who concluded Undetermined as the appropriate Manner of Death. These reviewed reports did not take into account multiple key points of evidence (such as no ability for another person to have been present and positioned to act). Another example, was that perhaps the decedent mistook the handgun for his cell phone and was calling 911 (even intoxicated, as he was, the weight and manner of holding and completing a call are not the same as the operation of a semi-automatic handgun; and his cell phone was in his bedroom).
Our agency review of the empirical evidence and events concluded that the fatal shot could not have been from a person, other than the decedent, due to his location and furnishings, and final resting position. Consequential evidence, including body position and blood spatter, were consistent with the bullet trajectory (into the walls and ceiling).
Conclusively, this death was not as a consequence of homicide.
Wrongful Death - Homicide or Justifiable Self-Defense (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by next-of-kin to review the official records, reports, photographs and additional evidentiary information into the shooting death of a relative. The decedent was found outside his residence, deceased, with two gunshot wounds. Responding family members found two neighbors approximate to the decedent. By report, the neighbors were returning to their home when observing the decedent being aggressive towards them. At that time one neighbor retrieved his firearm, discharging three times and striking the decedent twice; the first shot was reported to be a warning shot.
Responding law enforcement personnel initially investigated the incident as self-defense. However, independent review noted: 1) the vehicle incident position and final resting position; 2) trajectory of the ejected shell casings relative to likely and less likely positions of the neighbors and the decedent; and 3) positions of neighbors.
Our agency concluded that the empirical evidence with the series of events, as described by the neighbors, are inconsistent with the evidence of the official investigation. Specifically, the following findings present reasonable concerns that the findings of the official investigation are inconsistent with the evidence of the same. This includes the position of the decedent at the time of firearm discharge, position of the shooter at the time of discharging the firearm, position of the second neighbor at the time of the discharges of the firearm, and the position of the vehicle at the time of the discharges of the firearm and its final resting position. Of primary concern due to being unsupported by the reviewed evidence, is the position of the shooter.
It is our opinion that there is foundation for consideration of limited continued official investigation for the purpose of reconciling those issues presented herein.
Our agency was retained by next-of-kin to review the official records, reports, photographs and additional evidentiary information into the shooting death of a relative. The decedent was found outside his residence, deceased, with two gunshot wounds. Responding family members found two neighbors approximate to the decedent. By report, the neighbors were returning to their home when observing the decedent being aggressive towards them. At that time one neighbor retrieved his firearm, discharging three times and striking the decedent twice; the first shot was reported to be a warning shot.
Responding law enforcement personnel initially investigated the incident as self-defense. However, independent review noted: 1) the vehicle incident position and final resting position; 2) trajectory of the ejected shell casings relative to likely and less likely positions of the neighbors and the decedent; and 3) positions of neighbors.
Our agency concluded that the empirical evidence with the series of events, as described by the neighbors, are inconsistent with the evidence of the official investigation. Specifically, the following findings present reasonable concerns that the findings of the official investigation are inconsistent with the evidence of the same. This includes the position of the decedent at the time of firearm discharge, position of the shooter at the time of discharging the firearm, position of the second neighbor at the time of the discharges of the firearm, and the position of the vehicle at the time of the discharges of the firearm and its final resting position. Of primary concern due to being unsupported by the reviewed evidence, is the position of the shooter.
It is our opinion that there is foundation for consideration of limited continued official investigation for the purpose of reconciling those issues presented herein.
- Inconsistent statements of the neighbors, together and individually, as to the actions of the decedent, location of the decedent at firearm discharge, and number of shots fired.
- Wound trajectories are inconsistent with the statements of the neighbors, together and individually, as to the actions and location of the shooter at the time of firearm discharge.
- Location of the spent shell casings are inconsistent with the statements of the neighbors, together and individually, as to the actions and position of shooter at the time of firearm discharge.
- Wound trajectories are inconsistent with the statements of the neighbors, together and individually, as to the actions and position of the decedent at the time of firearm discharge.
- Location of the spent shell casings are inconsistent with the statements of the neighbors, together and individually, as to the actions and position of the decedent at the time of firearm discharge.
Wrongful Death - Time of Death (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the family to review the official reports and medical records of a single-vehicle motor vehicle crash involving two persons.
Both persons were intoxicated and had been served alcohol underage and while visibly intoxicated. One occupant was ejected from the vehicle and pronounced at the scene, and a second occupant was found by first responders, sitting against the vehicle. This occupant was conscious, but incoherent and transported to a nearby hospital. This occupant's recollection was uncertain, however certain that their own position in the vehicle was as a passenger. This was consistent with information that the other occupant of the vehicle was the owner. There were no witnesses at the scene and none that had observed either person getting in the vehicle. The decedent's time of death was reported as the 911 call, by the surviving occupant. This is not an unusual practice, however, is not wholly accurate and is only a reference tool.
Information at the scene included a twelve-pack of beer, mostly consumed, and some associated empty cans. Additional information included that the surviving occupant's mother received a cell phone call about one hour prior to the 911 call; both by the surviving occupant, which there was no recollection of and the mother indicated it was her belief that the crash had not occurred. An autopsy was not conducted on the decedent. Available reports and photographs indicated that the decedent was in full rigor mortis at the time of emergency services response. This information placed the time of the collision much closer to the last time these individuals were seen - on a video in a bar, very unstable on their feet and being served.
Our consultation assisted the accident reconstructionist and was instrumental in determining that the surviving occupant made both phone calls after the crash. Consultation with experts in traumatic brain injuries provided that a person can complete tasks with no recollection of doing so.*
Case settled with all parties before trial.
* A survivor of the Oklahoma City bombing (a building across the street severely damaged), with a traumatic brain injury, transported herself to the airport and boarded her scheduled flight to the east coast and reported for work as scheduled. It was at work that co-workers noted her behavior and that she was in Oklahoma City at the time of the bombing. She had no recollection of the event or her travel to the airport and home.
Both persons were intoxicated and had been served alcohol underage and while visibly intoxicated. One occupant was ejected from the vehicle and pronounced at the scene, and a second occupant was found by first responders, sitting against the vehicle. This occupant was conscious, but incoherent and transported to a nearby hospital. This occupant's recollection was uncertain, however certain that their own position in the vehicle was as a passenger. This was consistent with information that the other occupant of the vehicle was the owner. There were no witnesses at the scene and none that had observed either person getting in the vehicle. The decedent's time of death was reported as the 911 call, by the surviving occupant. This is not an unusual practice, however, is not wholly accurate and is only a reference tool.
Information at the scene included a twelve-pack of beer, mostly consumed, and some associated empty cans. Additional information included that the surviving occupant's mother received a cell phone call about one hour prior to the 911 call; both by the surviving occupant, which there was no recollection of and the mother indicated it was her belief that the crash had not occurred. An autopsy was not conducted on the decedent. Available reports and photographs indicated that the decedent was in full rigor mortis at the time of emergency services response. This information placed the time of the collision much closer to the last time these individuals were seen - on a video in a bar, very unstable on their feet and being served.
Our consultation assisted the accident reconstructionist and was instrumental in determining that the surviving occupant made both phone calls after the crash. Consultation with experts in traumatic brain injuries provided that a person can complete tasks with no recollection of doing so.*
Case settled with all parties before trial.
* A survivor of the Oklahoma City bombing (a building across the street severely damaged), with a traumatic brain injury, transported herself to the airport and boarded her scheduled flight to the east coast and reported for work as scheduled. It was at work that co-workers noted her behavior and that she was in Oklahoma City at the time of the bombing. She had no recollection of the event or her travel to the airport and home.
Sexual Assault - Criminal Defense (Legal Investigation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant. In reviewing the available prosecution discovery, it was immediately determined that the official investigation was deficient and not properly conducted; it was incomplete and replete with errors. This included that only the alleged victim and defendant were initially interviewed by responding and arresting officers. The day of the incident (having occurred in the early morning hours), a plain clothes detective attempted to interview the defendant's two sons, who were witnesses. At a later date, two neighbors - one an active duty police officer in another jurisdiction, contacted the investigating detective and provided statements; these were not followed-up. No other investigation, including a neighborhood canvas or background of the alleged victim, were conducted.
The defendant was being held, with a bond so high that it was equivalent to without bond, for several months. Independent investigation revealed that there were significant inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s description of events and not being as described after visiting the scene and determining the actual layout.
Investigation included a complete neighborhood canvas of the defendant's neighbors and neighbors of the alleged victim, as well as additional neighbors that were suggested to be contacted. In addition, a background of the alleged victim was conducted. The additional neighbor interviews confirmed reports found in the alleged victim's background - including reports of domestic violence, reports of her own sexually provocative behavior and advances, and activities of the night and morning in question that were not consistent with her reports at the time of the incident or following. Based on this new information, presented by the defense attorney to the prosecuting attorney, the assigned detective conducted additional interviews of the alleged victim and neighbors.
As a result of this information, a new bond hearing was requested and held. The bond was reduced to an amount that allowed the defendant to post bail and return to work. Within a short period of time following reporting the findings from these interviews, the prosecuting attorney offered to dismiss all charges for a plea to misdemeanor harassment with time served and probation.
The defendant accepted the offer of a non-sex assault misdemeanor.
The defendant was being held, with a bond so high that it was equivalent to without bond, for several months. Independent investigation revealed that there were significant inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s description of events and not being as described after visiting the scene and determining the actual layout.
Investigation included a complete neighborhood canvas of the defendant's neighbors and neighbors of the alleged victim, as well as additional neighbors that were suggested to be contacted. In addition, a background of the alleged victim was conducted. The additional neighbor interviews confirmed reports found in the alleged victim's background - including reports of domestic violence, reports of her own sexually provocative behavior and advances, and activities of the night and morning in question that were not consistent with her reports at the time of the incident or following. Based on this new information, presented by the defense attorney to the prosecuting attorney, the assigned detective conducted additional interviews of the alleged victim and neighbors.
As a result of this information, a new bond hearing was requested and held. The bond was reduced to an amount that allowed the defendant to post bail and return to work. Within a short period of time following reporting the findings from these interviews, the prosecuting attorney offered to dismiss all charges for a plea to misdemeanor harassment with time served and probation.
The defendant accepted the offer of a non-sex assault misdemeanor.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by the family to review the official investigation and provide a determination of the Manner of Death; the Cause of Death - Gunshot Wound to the head was not disputed. Assignments included to review the official records, reports and photographs and provide an opinion as to the fatal injury causation. At question was the if the decedent committed suicide as reported. Provided for review were over one hundred photographs, and several dozen pages of reports, records, and statements. The decedent was found supine in his bed, with both hands clenched and in a semi-pugilisitic position. A semi-automatic handgun was next to his left side, in the blanket. A contact gunshot wound was determined near the left temple, and exit at the right ear lobe. His identification had been removed from his wallet and placed on the kitchen counter, next to a note initially thought to be a suicide note but determined to be from his girlfriend. His wallet was on the television in his bedroom.
Toxicology, as noted in the autopsy report, included fatal levels of methadone and another prescription drug. The trajectory was confirmed as consistent with a likely position at the time of the gunshot. Blood spatter was consistent with both being a self-inflicted or inflicted by another person. The decedent was right handed. Also noted in review, but not the autopsy or investigative reports, was frothy blood - absent blood, this is often seen in opiate overdoses.
Investigation and additional consultation with a forensic toxicology laboratory confirmed that the levels of the drugs would have incapacitated the decedent, leaving him unable to manipulate a handgun and self-inflict the gunshot wound. It was determined that the gunshot was peri-mortem; however the Cause of Death could not have been due to the gunshot wound.
It was our opinion that there was foundation that merits the reopening of this equivocal death.
Presently and pending further official investigation, the Cause of Death is best reclassified as ‘overdose due to multi-drug toxicity’; and the Manner of Death as ‘Undetermined’ (suicide vs. homicide); and other conditions not resulting in death should include ‘Peri-mortem single gunshot wound to the head of unknown origin’.
Toxicology, as noted in the autopsy report, included fatal levels of methadone and another prescription drug. The trajectory was confirmed as consistent with a likely position at the time of the gunshot. Blood spatter was consistent with both being a self-inflicted or inflicted by another person. The decedent was right handed. Also noted in review, but not the autopsy or investigative reports, was frothy blood - absent blood, this is often seen in opiate overdoses.
Investigation and additional consultation with a forensic toxicology laboratory confirmed that the levels of the drugs would have incapacitated the decedent, leaving him unable to manipulate a handgun and self-inflict the gunshot wound. It was determined that the gunshot was peri-mortem; however the Cause of Death could not have been due to the gunshot wound.
It was our opinion that there was foundation that merits the reopening of this equivocal death.
Presently and pending further official investigation, the Cause of Death is best reclassified as ‘overdose due to multi-drug toxicity’; and the Manner of Death as ‘Undetermined’ (suicide vs. homicide); and other conditions not resulting in death should include ‘Peri-mortem single gunshot wound to the head of unknown origin’.
Criminal Defense - Homicide and Injury Causation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant in this capital murder case. Assignments included to review the official records, reports and photographs and provide an opinion as to the fatal injury causation. At question was the type of weapon used and if the injuries are as described by reporting witnesses and if the death occurred as reported; specifically, actions of the assailant. Provided for review were over one hundred photographs, and several dozen pages of reports, records, and statements.
The decedent was in a night club and fatally stabbed multiple times. By report, two persons were witnessed to have been the assailants, one identified as the defendant. It was reported by witnesses that the co-assailant first pulled the decedent’s shirt over his head, and at that time the defendant stabbed him multiple times. The defendant was charged with pre-meditated first degree murder.
A physical altercation is dynamic and involves a series of movements of the body that may or may not correspond to the movement of the clothing, i.e. if the clothing is loose fitting or snug. As an example, pants and tucked in and/or buttoned shirts will more closely conform to the movements to the body; whereas unbuttoned or loose shirts will not. It was determined that the decedent’s shirt was not pulled over in the manner described and remained the same general proximity during the altercation, with slight movement right of midline to the decedent’s right (towards midline) and down; approximately 1” both directions.
The defendant was found guilty at jury trial of second degree murder.
The decedent was in a night club and fatally stabbed multiple times. By report, two persons were witnessed to have been the assailants, one identified as the defendant. It was reported by witnesses that the co-assailant first pulled the decedent’s shirt over his head, and at that time the defendant stabbed him multiple times. The defendant was charged with pre-meditated first degree murder.
A physical altercation is dynamic and involves a series of movements of the body that may or may not correspond to the movement of the clothing, i.e. if the clothing is loose fitting or snug. As an example, pants and tucked in and/or buttoned shirts will more closely conform to the movements to the body; whereas unbuttoned or loose shirts will not. It was determined that the decedent’s shirt was not pulled over in the manner described and remained the same general proximity during the altercation, with slight movement right of midline to the decedent’s right (towards midline) and down; approximately 1” both directions.
The defendant was found guilty at jury trial of second degree murder.
Criminal Defense - Homicide and Injury Causation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant in this capital murder case. Assignments included to review the official records, reports and photographs and provide an opinion as to the circumstances of death. At question was if the injuries are as described by reporting witnesses and if the death occurred only as reported. Specifically, the number of weapons (reported to be one) and assailants, as well as assault activity. Provided for review were several hundred photographs, several thousand pages of reports, records, transcripts and statements, and several hours of interview audio.
The decedent was consensually picked up by a group from an outlaw motorcycle gang and went to the clubhouse to party. By report the decedent consumed alcohol and was disrespectful to members, resulting in physical assault and then transported to a remote location and left. It was variously reported that she unconscious and/or unresponsive when transported. She was found by passers-by in a decomposed state, clad in clothing last known to be seen in.
Independent investigation determined that both the official law enforcement investigation and death investigation were deficient in following standard protocols, from evidence collection to scene documentation. Witnesses provided different statements over the course of the investigation and multiple interviews. These statements were mixed and matched by law enforcement and prosecution to present one statement that purported to satisfy the theories of the crime and elements of the charges. However, multiple deficiencies were identified and presented.
In analyzing the decedent’s injuries and defects in the clothing, it was determined that multiple weapons were used, to include a stiletto style dual sharp-edged, single sharp-edged with a distinct blunt/flat opposite edge blade, and ingle sharp-edged with a smaller or narrow opposite edge blade. The primary witness for the prosecution provided information that one weapon was used among multiple assailants, including himself. There were distinct locations of use of specific weapons. He further described specific injuries that were inconsistent with the analysis. Investigation also determined that the decedent was likely alive, possibly unconscious, at the time of transport and deceased when left at the remote location.
During jury selection, the defendant was offered, and accepted a plea, from 1st degree / death penalty to second degree.
The decedent was consensually picked up by a group from an outlaw motorcycle gang and went to the clubhouse to party. By report the decedent consumed alcohol and was disrespectful to members, resulting in physical assault and then transported to a remote location and left. It was variously reported that she unconscious and/or unresponsive when transported. She was found by passers-by in a decomposed state, clad in clothing last known to be seen in.
Independent investigation determined that both the official law enforcement investigation and death investigation were deficient in following standard protocols, from evidence collection to scene documentation. Witnesses provided different statements over the course of the investigation and multiple interviews. These statements were mixed and matched by law enforcement and prosecution to present one statement that purported to satisfy the theories of the crime and elements of the charges. However, multiple deficiencies were identified and presented.
In analyzing the decedent’s injuries and defects in the clothing, it was determined that multiple weapons were used, to include a stiletto style dual sharp-edged, single sharp-edged with a distinct blunt/flat opposite edge blade, and ingle sharp-edged with a smaller or narrow opposite edge blade. The primary witness for the prosecution provided information that one weapon was used among multiple assailants, including himself. There were distinct locations of use of specific weapons. He further described specific injuries that were inconsistent with the analysis. Investigation also determined that the decedent was likely alive, possibly unconscious, at the time of transport and deceased when left at the remote location.
During jury selection, the defendant was offered, and accepted a plea, from 1st degree / death penalty to second degree.
Wrongful Death - Nursing Home Elder Death (Legal and Expert)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the family to review the medical records and investigate a death reported as suspicious by the funeral home to the family. The funeral home notified the county coroner’s office.
Investigation revealed that the coroner’s office was given false information by the decedent’s nurse. Upon notification by the funeral home, an autopsy and thorough investigation were completed.
The records reflected that the underlying incident was the result of another unsupervised patient forcibly shoving the decedent backwards, causing her to fall and hit her head after landing supine. Her complaints of severe pain continued in the days following, including comfort care pain protocol - Vicodin was ordered, as was an increase in dosage and frequency of morphine. There was some noted concern of oxygen saturation levels below 'Adequate' and nearing 'Inadequate'.
This death, in reviewing only the records, was clearly exacerbated by the incident and the consequential required comfort care protocol. There were also found issues of improper incident documentation, corrective follow-up, family and health board notifications, resident monitoring and enhanced staff training for handling these situations and residents.
Specific to the circumstances of death, the increased narcotic analgesics due to the incident and severe pain lead to the inability of the decedent to maintain adequate oxygen saturation levels. This exacerbated the inability to metabolize the administered morphine, resulting in the elevated morphine levels found in postmortem toxicology. Investigation also determined that there was in adequate supervision, including staff-to-resident ratio, in the activity room at the time of the incident. There was no previous reported history of intra-resident physical altercations or deaths with unusual or suspicious circumstances. However, there were similar past occurrence reports that included issues of oxygen therapy, bowel movement checks and care, intra-resident abuse, etc.
Independent investigation concurred with the official ruling of Accident due to morphine toxicity as a result of a fall.
Case was reported to have settled before trial.
Investigation revealed that the coroner’s office was given false information by the decedent’s nurse. Upon notification by the funeral home, an autopsy and thorough investigation were completed.
The records reflected that the underlying incident was the result of another unsupervised patient forcibly shoving the decedent backwards, causing her to fall and hit her head after landing supine. Her complaints of severe pain continued in the days following, including comfort care pain protocol - Vicodin was ordered, as was an increase in dosage and frequency of morphine. There was some noted concern of oxygen saturation levels below 'Adequate' and nearing 'Inadequate'.
This death, in reviewing only the records, was clearly exacerbated by the incident and the consequential required comfort care protocol. There were also found issues of improper incident documentation, corrective follow-up, family and health board notifications, resident monitoring and enhanced staff training for handling these situations and residents.
Specific to the circumstances of death, the increased narcotic analgesics due to the incident and severe pain lead to the inability of the decedent to maintain adequate oxygen saturation levels. This exacerbated the inability to metabolize the administered morphine, resulting in the elevated morphine levels found in postmortem toxicology. Investigation also determined that there was in adequate supervision, including staff-to-resident ratio, in the activity room at the time of the incident. There was no previous reported history of intra-resident physical altercations or deaths with unusual or suspicious circumstances. However, there were similar past occurrence reports that included issues of oxygen therapy, bowel movement checks and care, intra-resident abuse, etc.
Independent investigation concurred with the official ruling of Accident due to morphine toxicity as a result of a fall.
Case was reported to have settled before trial.
Personal Injury - Officer Injury Incident to Response (Legal Investigation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the plaintiff, an injured law enforcement officer, who responded to a large bar disturbance. The altercation was at a private wedding reception involving wedding guests. One guest was intoxicated and uncooperative, resulting in being forcibly arrested and causing injury to the Plaintiff.
Investigation included interviewing multiple persons known to have been at the bar, including employees. It was determined that bartenders did willfully and knowingly serve alcohol to visibly intoxicated persons and underage persons. Specifically, the uncooperative person causing injury to the Plaintiff was determined to have been served while visibly intoxicated by multiple bartenders. It was also determined that there was inadequate supervision by the bar, knowing in advance the estimated attendees from the wedding party. Further investigation revealed that there was no consumption of alcohol in advance, nor had any persons interviewed used any prescription or illicit drugs at that time.
Plaintiff was awarded damages at trial.
Investigation included interviewing multiple persons known to have been at the bar, including employees. It was determined that bartenders did willfully and knowingly serve alcohol to visibly intoxicated persons and underage persons. Specifically, the uncooperative person causing injury to the Plaintiff was determined to have been served while visibly intoxicated by multiple bartenders. It was also determined that there was inadequate supervision by the bar, knowing in advance the estimated attendees from the wedding party. Further investigation revealed that there was no consumption of alcohol in advance, nor had any persons interviewed used any prescription or illicit drugs at that time.
Plaintiff was awarded damages at trial.
Criminal Defense - Child Sex Assault (Legal Investigation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant. In reviewing the available prosecution discovery, it was immediately determined that the official investigation was deficient and poorly conducted; it was incomplete.
The initial investigating officer followed procedure in taking the report and conducting initial interviews. He also contacted the on-call detective, who did not respond. A detective was assigned to the case after several days. Several key investigative opportunities were missed. These opportunities were neglected with charges brought forth by inconsistent statements of the victims and witnesses. Moreover, when the assigned detective did take a role, efforts were spent only on validating the initial officer’s findings, and not any independent investigation. It was only after the prosecutor’s office returned the case, requesting additional investigation, was this done. This renewed investigation was limited to second interviews with the reporting alleged victims, two persons not present at the reporting incident, and the uncharged suspect, who had retained an attorney. The detective did interview a person present at the reporting incident, and upon re-interview by our agency it was determined that his interview was inaccurately reported. Approximately one month after the reporting incident, a third child of the family was officially interviewed and determined to not be a witness or victim to any incident. Without contacting any other persons at the reporting incident, this case was again sent to the prosecutor’s office for filing of charges. Again, the case was returned for additional investigation. The detective conducted additional interviews and re-submitted the case, resulting in multiple charges of sexual assault on a child, approximately five months after the reporting incident.
Independent review of the prosecution’s discovery revealed multiple investigative errors and misinformation, including multiple differing accounts of the same alleged incidents. Independent investigation, including scene investigations not conducted by law enforcement, also revealed multiple areas of inaccurate and false information. Independent interviews of multiple witnesses not previously interviewed and additional witnesses supported information determined during the course of the independent investigation. A summary report was provided to the prosecutor approximately eight months after the reported incident and six months after charges were filed.
More than 18 months after the reported incident the prosecutor’s office dismissed all charges after re-interviewing the alleged victims.
The initial investigating officer followed procedure in taking the report and conducting initial interviews. He also contacted the on-call detective, who did not respond. A detective was assigned to the case after several days. Several key investigative opportunities were missed. These opportunities were neglected with charges brought forth by inconsistent statements of the victims and witnesses. Moreover, when the assigned detective did take a role, efforts were spent only on validating the initial officer’s findings, and not any independent investigation. It was only after the prosecutor’s office returned the case, requesting additional investigation, was this done. This renewed investigation was limited to second interviews with the reporting alleged victims, two persons not present at the reporting incident, and the uncharged suspect, who had retained an attorney. The detective did interview a person present at the reporting incident, and upon re-interview by our agency it was determined that his interview was inaccurately reported. Approximately one month after the reporting incident, a third child of the family was officially interviewed and determined to not be a witness or victim to any incident. Without contacting any other persons at the reporting incident, this case was again sent to the prosecutor’s office for filing of charges. Again, the case was returned for additional investigation. The detective conducted additional interviews and re-submitted the case, resulting in multiple charges of sexual assault on a child, approximately five months after the reporting incident.
Independent review of the prosecution’s discovery revealed multiple investigative errors and misinformation, including multiple differing accounts of the same alleged incidents. Independent investigation, including scene investigations not conducted by law enforcement, also revealed multiple areas of inaccurate and false information. Independent interviews of multiple witnesses not previously interviewed and additional witnesses supported information determined during the course of the independent investigation. A summary report was provided to the prosecutor approximately eight months after the reported incident and six months after charges were filed.
More than 18 months after the reported incident the prosecutor’s office dismissed all charges after re-interviewing the alleged victims.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by private counsel on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent was found by his wife, deceased on his bed. There were indications of a possible struggle. The official ruling was Accident due to blunt force injuries consequential to a fall while intoxicated.
Received and reviewed were the official reports, records and scene photographs, as well as statements from family members. There were no autopsy photographs available.
The decedent was found by an off-duty law enforcement officer. The decedent’s wife had been unable to reach him all day and called a friend, a local law enforcement officer, to check for her before she entered the home. This entry was reported to the dispatch office. There was no domestic history, medical history or contributing social history – such as depression or suicidal ideations – of any involved persons.
Review of the reports and photographs revealed that the body had not been moved prior to being found and had been deceased for several hours, including prior to his wife leaving for work. The previous night the decedent had been up drinking and would often sleep downstairs in a separate bed when similarly intoxicated. His wife had no reason to think differently this night. There were no wounds, offensive or defensive, on the decedent or wife. There was a small contusion on the decedent’s back, near his right shoulder. One area disturbance in the house was on the wall to the stairs leading down to the basement bedroom. This was a circular defect in the wall from an object impacting. It was opined after review that this may have been the decedent’s shoulder. Another area was a table on the stair landing, between the upper and lower floors. Items on top were disturbed. The pattern injury to the decedent’s back was consistent with the edge of the table. Toxicology was positive for alcohol, .202; no other substances. This level of intoxication is contributory to a high-level of disorientation.
Independent investigation concurred with the official investigation.
Received and reviewed were the official reports, records and scene photographs, as well as statements from family members. There were no autopsy photographs available.
The decedent was found by an off-duty law enforcement officer. The decedent’s wife had been unable to reach him all day and called a friend, a local law enforcement officer, to check for her before she entered the home. This entry was reported to the dispatch office. There was no domestic history, medical history or contributing social history – such as depression or suicidal ideations – of any involved persons.
Review of the reports and photographs revealed that the body had not been moved prior to being found and had been deceased for several hours, including prior to his wife leaving for work. The previous night the decedent had been up drinking and would often sleep downstairs in a separate bed when similarly intoxicated. His wife had no reason to think differently this night. There were no wounds, offensive or defensive, on the decedent or wife. There was a small contusion on the decedent’s back, near his right shoulder. One area disturbance in the house was on the wall to the stairs leading down to the basement bedroom. This was a circular defect in the wall from an object impacting. It was opined after review that this may have been the decedent’s shoulder. Another area was a table on the stair landing, between the upper and lower floors. Items on top were disturbed. The pattern injury to the decedent’s back was consistent with the edge of the table. Toxicology was positive for alcohol, .202; no other substances. This level of intoxication is contributory to a high-level of disorientation.
Independent investigation concurred with the official investigation.
Domestic Relation - Private Investigator Ethics (Expert Witness)
Our agency was retained by private counsel on behalf of the petitioner in a dissolution of marriage action. At question were the methodologies used by the private investigators retained by the respondent. Multiple private investigators were retained to contact the petitioner under pretext to obtain incriminating information to be used in a child custody hearing.
Received and reviewed were records, statements and audio recordings provided to counsel during the course of the disclosure stage of the proceedings. Multiple private investigators had contacted the petitioner under pretext and had extended conversations. During the conversations leading questions were asked and responses provided that were offered as incriminating. At question were deceit, entrapment and invasion of privacy.
Independent review determined that these statements, taken as a whole and in context with the full conversations, were innocuous and simple banter. It was determined that there were no violations of state law, particularly involving the recording of a private conversation between two or more people. The state law permitted such recordings if at least one party had knowledge (a one-party state). The state does not license or regulate private investigators; however, the municipality did require registration. Therefore, there could be no violation of licensing regulations. However, when the private investigator is retained by counsel, they are bound by the same ethical standards. Both state and American Bar Association ethics rules specifically barred such actions as perpetrated by the private investigators. It should be noted that these private investigators were retained directly by the respondent, and not by his counsel. Therefore, there was no actual violation. In the same ethical rules it is advised that counsel not use evidence obtained in this manner, but it is permitted. Finally, professional investigators are advised to follow a code of ethics widely distributed, recognized and adapted by various professional associations. One flaw of pretexting is the use of leading questions, or entrapment. Entrapment is an action only of law enforcement. However, it is generally unethical to give a leading or misleading statement as it may produce a response that would not otherwise be the normal words of the subject. Invasion of privacy occurred when the private investigators encroached upon private property using deceit and trickery to gain access.
All applicable ethical codes forbid a private investigator from contacting a represented party without permission of the party’s counsel and must also provide full disclosure. It was determined that these private investigators did violate these ethical standards, but did not belong to any professional associations.
The ideal, and ethically acceptable, environment and methodology would have been to engage or overhear the petitioner in a natural conversation in a public place. In doing so, there would have been no expectation of privacy and any utterances may have been considered spoken freely.
The presiding judge did rule that the private investigators violated accepted practices in obtaining information by using false identities and information – pretext. The information from the recordings was not permitted at future hearings.
The outcome of this case was favorable to the plaintiff.
Received and reviewed were records, statements and audio recordings provided to counsel during the course of the disclosure stage of the proceedings. Multiple private investigators had contacted the petitioner under pretext and had extended conversations. During the conversations leading questions were asked and responses provided that were offered as incriminating. At question were deceit, entrapment and invasion of privacy.
Independent review determined that these statements, taken as a whole and in context with the full conversations, were innocuous and simple banter. It was determined that there were no violations of state law, particularly involving the recording of a private conversation between two or more people. The state law permitted such recordings if at least one party had knowledge (a one-party state). The state does not license or regulate private investigators; however, the municipality did require registration. Therefore, there could be no violation of licensing regulations. However, when the private investigator is retained by counsel, they are bound by the same ethical standards. Both state and American Bar Association ethics rules specifically barred such actions as perpetrated by the private investigators. It should be noted that these private investigators were retained directly by the respondent, and not by his counsel. Therefore, there was no actual violation. In the same ethical rules it is advised that counsel not use evidence obtained in this manner, but it is permitted. Finally, professional investigators are advised to follow a code of ethics widely distributed, recognized and adapted by various professional associations. One flaw of pretexting is the use of leading questions, or entrapment. Entrapment is an action only of law enforcement. However, it is generally unethical to give a leading or misleading statement as it may produce a response that would not otherwise be the normal words of the subject. Invasion of privacy occurred when the private investigators encroached upon private property using deceit and trickery to gain access.
All applicable ethical codes forbid a private investigator from contacting a represented party without permission of the party’s counsel and must also provide full disclosure. It was determined that these private investigators did violate these ethical standards, but did not belong to any professional associations.
The ideal, and ethically acceptable, environment and methodology would have been to engage or overhear the petitioner in a natural conversation in a public place. In doing so, there would have been no expectation of privacy and any utterances may have been considered spoken freely.
The presiding judge did rule that the private investigators violated accepted practices in obtaining information by using false identities and information – pretext. The information from the recordings was not permitted at future hearings.
The outcome of this case was favorable to the plaintiff.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by private counsel on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent was found by construction workers, approximately 20 feet from the base of a six-story parking garage. The official ruling was Suicide due to blunt force injuries consequential to a fall from height.
The family provided information questioning the official investigation and suspected homicide. What the family did not disclose, but a witness contacted by this agency revealed, was that the family had accepted a multi-million dollar settlement related to the decedent committing suicide as a result of neglect and treatment of the decedent that they alleged resulted in his suicide. To this agency they presented that the decedent’s treatment was a result of revealing historical molestation of children by other persons, who then conspired to have his death appear as a suicide. Investigation revealed that the investigation of the medical examiner’s office was sufficient and without any notable errors or deficiencies. However, the official law enforcement investigation was deficient in several areas of investigative protocol, including manner of reporting, photography and scene investigation. The investigation was primarily handled by responding patrol deputies, with post-scene investigation follow-up by multiple assigned detectives, most notably after concerns of the family presented. There were several major deficiencies in the scene photography – which can be imperative to the investigation, as well as civil and criminal judicial processes. Reporting by several documented responding personnel were never completed. Any personnel responding to or involved in an incident should be making a report that is supplemental to the initial responders report. All witnesses should be contacted, and a detailed report to supplement any written statements, made included.
Independent investigation found that the area was easily accessible by the Decedent, any minor physical impairments (slight limp) would not have impeded the short distance walk. All levels of the parking garage had an approximate four-foot retaining wall along the perimeter. A notepad, with the decedent’s handwriting, was found on the hood of a vehicle and both handprints and footprints were reported – but not photographed – found on the same vehicle.
Independent investigation also found that the decedent had a previous incident of a confirmed attempted suicide (multiple witnesses), also from a height. This resulted in hospitalization, including mental health confinement, brief confinement to a wheelchair and physical therapy. This was not reported by the family to this agency.
An analysis of the height and distance from the base, decedent trajectory, found that it was consistent with known and researched similar incidents. It was also determined that the decedent was not unconscious and dropped from the height. Research found that the final place of rest would have been closer to the base of the parking garage. Moreover, a witness saw the body falling at approximately the fifth floor, and did not report any other persons in proximity. However, not knowing the exact position of the witness and the upward angle of her vision (at 100-150 yards and requiring bifocals), it is possible that any person(s) could have been blocked from their field of view by the retaining barrier or hidden by their lack of vision acuity.
Other considerations were that this death was on the Decedent’s birthday and that he had contacted his psychiatrist earlier that day (also not a detail provided by the family). There was a history of extended mental health disorder with diagnosis of schizophrenia and bipolar, treated with prescribed medications (again, details not provided by the family).
Independent investigation concurred with the official ruling of Suicide due to a fall from height.
The family provided information questioning the official investigation and suspected homicide. What the family did not disclose, but a witness contacted by this agency revealed, was that the family had accepted a multi-million dollar settlement related to the decedent committing suicide as a result of neglect and treatment of the decedent that they alleged resulted in his suicide. To this agency they presented that the decedent’s treatment was a result of revealing historical molestation of children by other persons, who then conspired to have his death appear as a suicide. Investigation revealed that the investigation of the medical examiner’s office was sufficient and without any notable errors or deficiencies. However, the official law enforcement investigation was deficient in several areas of investigative protocol, including manner of reporting, photography and scene investigation. The investigation was primarily handled by responding patrol deputies, with post-scene investigation follow-up by multiple assigned detectives, most notably after concerns of the family presented. There were several major deficiencies in the scene photography – which can be imperative to the investigation, as well as civil and criminal judicial processes. Reporting by several documented responding personnel were never completed. Any personnel responding to or involved in an incident should be making a report that is supplemental to the initial responders report. All witnesses should be contacted, and a detailed report to supplement any written statements, made included.
Independent investigation found that the area was easily accessible by the Decedent, any minor physical impairments (slight limp) would not have impeded the short distance walk. All levels of the parking garage had an approximate four-foot retaining wall along the perimeter. A notepad, with the decedent’s handwriting, was found on the hood of a vehicle and both handprints and footprints were reported – but not photographed – found on the same vehicle.
Independent investigation also found that the decedent had a previous incident of a confirmed attempted suicide (multiple witnesses), also from a height. This resulted in hospitalization, including mental health confinement, brief confinement to a wheelchair and physical therapy. This was not reported by the family to this agency.
An analysis of the height and distance from the base, decedent trajectory, found that it was consistent with known and researched similar incidents. It was also determined that the decedent was not unconscious and dropped from the height. Research found that the final place of rest would have been closer to the base of the parking garage. Moreover, a witness saw the body falling at approximately the fifth floor, and did not report any other persons in proximity. However, not knowing the exact position of the witness and the upward angle of her vision (at 100-150 yards and requiring bifocals), it is possible that any person(s) could have been blocked from their field of view by the retaining barrier or hidden by their lack of vision acuity.
Other considerations were that this death was on the Decedent’s birthday and that he had contacted his psychiatrist earlier that day (also not a detail provided by the family). There was a history of extended mental health disorder with diagnosis of schizophrenia and bipolar, treated with prescribed medications (again, details not provided by the family).
Independent investigation concurred with the official ruling of Suicide due to a fall from height.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by a private investigator on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent was found by family members in his garage with a gunshot wound under his chin; a shotgun was by his side. Family members reported that the decedent’s co-habitant girlfriend and her young son were home. An argument and alcohol consumption had preceded this incident. The official ruling was Suicide due to a single gunshot wound to the head.
Information for investigative review purposes was limited to scene photographs and statements from non-present family members. This is usually insufficient to conduct an adequate Equivocal Death Investigation. As a subject matter expert on blood spatter and crime scenes, this agency was contacted to review the photographs and determine if a more comprehensive investigation should be conducted by the retained private investigator.
A review of the photographs revealed several important factors in support of suicide. Blood spatter was absent (referred to as ‘void’) in key areas that indicated the decedent was holding, and how, the shotgun at the time of discharge and his consequential death. This information was presented to the family to their satisfaction. By report, the official investigation did not address this important issue of blood spatter.
Independent investigation concurred with the official ruling of Suicide due to a single shotgun wound to the chin.
Information for investigative review purposes was limited to scene photographs and statements from non-present family members. This is usually insufficient to conduct an adequate Equivocal Death Investigation. As a subject matter expert on blood spatter and crime scenes, this agency was contacted to review the photographs and determine if a more comprehensive investigation should be conducted by the retained private investigator.
A review of the photographs revealed several important factors in support of suicide. Blood spatter was absent (referred to as ‘void’) in key areas that indicated the decedent was holding, and how, the shotgun at the time of discharge and his consequential death. This information was presented to the family to their satisfaction. By report, the official investigation did not address this important issue of blood spatter.
Independent investigation concurred with the official ruling of Suicide due to a single shotgun wound to the chin.
Decedent Identification - Protocol Opinion (Expert Affidavit)
Decedent Identification – Protocol Opinion (Expert) Our agency was retained by appeal counsel, based on our experience in identification of human remains at the medical examiner’s offices, to assist with a post-conviction appeal. At issue was if the official investigation used the available resources and protocols to identify the decedent, and if such identification would have aided the defense. It should be noted that the decedent was not identified until several years post-conviction.
Based upon experience as death investigator and deputy coroner, it was opined that the likelihood of determining the decedent’s identity prior to the defendant’s trial would have been substantially increased if the defense had conducted a full investigation into the identity of the body found. The physical description of the decedent was entered into the FBI’s N.C.I.C. database. However, this information was either incorrect or too vague at key points of identification (clothing, hair color, height, weight, dentition, eye color, etc.). A forensic expert should have reviewed the description of “Jane Doe” that was entered to ensure that the description was correctly reported in a thorough way so that it could have the best chance of being matched up with relevant missing-person reports in the N.C.I.C. database.
This information may have resulted in a ‘hit’ and identification of the decedent before the trial and conviction. In addition, it was opined that the defense should have retained an independent forensic pathologist to perform a second autopsy or at least conduct an autopsy review. This would have increased the chances of finding additional characteristics that could lead to a more accurate description of “Jane Doe” that would lead to her identity. Other deficiencies in attempts to identify the decedent included failure to have a sketch and description sent to the available resources for identifying missing persons, regional law enforcement offices and medical examiner or coroner offices. This same information should have been provided to print media and television, available social networks, missing persons groups, non-profit groups (i.e. Red Cross and Salvation Army) and, private investigator and law enforcement associations.
It should be noted that this incident was approximately one decade ago and resources were more limited than at this time. This opinion was based upon resources available at that time.
Based upon experience as death investigator and deputy coroner, it was opined that the likelihood of determining the decedent’s identity prior to the defendant’s trial would have been substantially increased if the defense had conducted a full investigation into the identity of the body found. The physical description of the decedent was entered into the FBI’s N.C.I.C. database. However, this information was either incorrect or too vague at key points of identification (clothing, hair color, height, weight, dentition, eye color, etc.). A forensic expert should have reviewed the description of “Jane Doe” that was entered to ensure that the description was correctly reported in a thorough way so that it could have the best chance of being matched up with relevant missing-person reports in the N.C.I.C. database.
This information may have resulted in a ‘hit’ and identification of the decedent before the trial and conviction. In addition, it was opined that the defense should have retained an independent forensic pathologist to perform a second autopsy or at least conduct an autopsy review. This would have increased the chances of finding additional characteristics that could lead to a more accurate description of “Jane Doe” that would lead to her identity. Other deficiencies in attempts to identify the decedent included failure to have a sketch and description sent to the available resources for identifying missing persons, regional law enforcement offices and medical examiner or coroner offices. This same information should have been provided to print media and television, available social networks, missing persons groups, non-profit groups (i.e. Red Cross and Salvation Army) and, private investigator and law enforcement associations.
It should be noted that this incident was approximately one decade ago and resources were more limited than at this time. This opinion was based upon resources available at that time.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by a private investigator on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent was found by family members in his bed with a gunshot wound to the side of his head. A semi-automatic handgun was by his side. A roommate left that morning without seeing the decedent. There were no unusual circumstances reported of the prior evening. The official ruling was Suicide due to a single gunshot wound to the head.
Information for investigative review purposes was limited to scene photographs and statements from non-present family members and the roommate. This is usually insufficient to conduct an adequate Equivocal Death Investigation. As a subject matter expert on blood spatter and crime scenes, this agency was contacted to review the photographs and determine if a more comprehensive investigation should be conducted by the retained private investigator.
A review of the photographs revealed several important factors. The right hand of the decedent has blood spatter which is consistent with high velocity, such as would be expected in a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The quantity of blood is consistent, and not inordinate.
In addition, the magazine was found between the boxspring and mattress – not in the handgun. One bullet had been discharged and it was questioned if there was any plausible reason for the magazine to have been separated from the handgun. It was determined that this was as found by responding law enforcement. It is important to note that it is common for a firearm to be made ‘safe’, including removing the magazine and any live rounds of ammunition. It was determined that all evidence was photographed as found. The decedent was reported to have experience with firearms. It was considered that the decedent retrieved the handgun and placed the magazine in the location found, then presented himself in this final position with the intent to shoot himself. Also of consideration, it is not uncommon for an inexperienced person to incorrectly believe that a semi-automatic handgun is unloaded and safe when the magazine is ejected, then failing to check the chamber for a live round or to eject the same. The decedent may have had suicidal ideations and contemplated the same while incorrectly thinking he had made the handgun safe. This is still a suicide, although unintentional – his actions and motives are suicidal.
Independent investigation was provided as foundation for the primary investigation. Information was turned over to investigating officials for further consideration.
Information for investigative review purposes was limited to scene photographs and statements from non-present family members and the roommate. This is usually insufficient to conduct an adequate Equivocal Death Investigation. As a subject matter expert on blood spatter and crime scenes, this agency was contacted to review the photographs and determine if a more comprehensive investigation should be conducted by the retained private investigator.
A review of the photographs revealed several important factors. The right hand of the decedent has blood spatter which is consistent with high velocity, such as would be expected in a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The quantity of blood is consistent, and not inordinate.
In addition, the magazine was found between the boxspring and mattress – not in the handgun. One bullet had been discharged and it was questioned if there was any plausible reason for the magazine to have been separated from the handgun. It was determined that this was as found by responding law enforcement. It is important to note that it is common for a firearm to be made ‘safe’, including removing the magazine and any live rounds of ammunition. It was determined that all evidence was photographed as found. The decedent was reported to have experience with firearms. It was considered that the decedent retrieved the handgun and placed the magazine in the location found, then presented himself in this final position with the intent to shoot himself. Also of consideration, it is not uncommon for an inexperienced person to incorrectly believe that a semi-automatic handgun is unloaded and safe when the magazine is ejected, then failing to check the chamber for a live round or to eject the same. The decedent may have had suicidal ideations and contemplated the same while incorrectly thinking he had made the handgun safe. This is still a suicide, although unintentional – his actions and motives are suicidal.
Independent investigation was provided as foundation for the primary investigation. Information was turned over to investigating officials for further consideration.
Criminal Defense - Acquaintance Sex Assault (Legal Investigation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant. In reviewing the available prosecution discovery, it was immediately determined that the official investigation was deficient and not properly conducted; it was incomplete.
There are multiple points of consideration in the detective’s testimony at the preliminary hearing. The detective incorrectly stated as fact information from the alleged victim’s initial statement and subsequent interview, having different statements. The detective did acknowledge inconsistent statements of the alleged victim when questioned by defense counsel. Moreover, the detective testified, consistent with his reports, that he never visited the incident scene and had no personal knowledge of the layout, and he did not either have or take his own photographs of the residence. He was unable to testify as to the accuracy of the alleged victim’s statements based upon scene descriptions. Independent investigation revealed that there were significant inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s description of events and not being possible after visiting the scene and determining the actual layout.
Investigation and interview of witnesses also determined that the alleged victim did not consider the defendant or the residence any threat to her after the alleged assault. She chose to remain, alone, in the guest bedroom after the assault – although she knew from having drinks in the living room that she had an unobstructed opportunity to leave the residence, or in the alternative climb out the opened bedroom window and drop four feet. Moreover, as both persons were in a volunteer quasi-law enforcement position, and she had her cell phone in the bedroom, she could have called 911 or the ‘back line’ to their dispatch center. She could have called any friend or mutual friend. She did, the next morning, walk to her house; it is not known if she told her co-habitant boyfriend. She did call a friend mutual to the defendant and involved in the same volunteer position, to whom she first reported the incident and who transported her to a nearby hospital for examination. At that time law enforcement was called.
The defendant was offered and accepted a non-sex assault misdemeanor.
There are multiple points of consideration in the detective’s testimony at the preliminary hearing. The detective incorrectly stated as fact information from the alleged victim’s initial statement and subsequent interview, having different statements. The detective did acknowledge inconsistent statements of the alleged victim when questioned by defense counsel. Moreover, the detective testified, consistent with his reports, that he never visited the incident scene and had no personal knowledge of the layout, and he did not either have or take his own photographs of the residence. He was unable to testify as to the accuracy of the alleged victim’s statements based upon scene descriptions. Independent investigation revealed that there were significant inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s description of events and not being possible after visiting the scene and determining the actual layout.
Investigation and interview of witnesses also determined that the alleged victim did not consider the defendant or the residence any threat to her after the alleged assault. She chose to remain, alone, in the guest bedroom after the assault – although she knew from having drinks in the living room that she had an unobstructed opportunity to leave the residence, or in the alternative climb out the opened bedroom window and drop four feet. Moreover, as both persons were in a volunteer quasi-law enforcement position, and she had her cell phone in the bedroom, she could have called 911 or the ‘back line’ to their dispatch center. She could have called any friend or mutual friend. She did, the next morning, walk to her house; it is not known if she told her co-habitant boyfriend. She did call a friend mutual to the defendant and involved in the same volunteer position, to whom she first reported the incident and who transported her to a nearby hospital for examination. At that time law enforcement was called.
The defendant was offered and accepted a non-sex assault misdemeanor.
Criminal Defense - Homicide (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant. In reviewing the available prosecution discovery, it was immediately determined that the official investigation was properly conducted and the evidence consistent with the official reports.
Over 300 scene photographs and hundreds of pages of official reports were reviewed. A review of the scene photographs indicates that the decedent was at the door when the knife attack began, and identifying the initial and ultimately fatal wounds. The altercation continued outside and then the decedent was placed back inside the entry way. By report the residence was secured at the time of law enforcement response.
The defendant had no injuries and no blood spatter on his person. The decedent had fallen into the exterior pool of blood at the time of arrest. With this exception, the only other blood spatter found on his person was on part of one leg exposed by shorts.
Independent investigation was unable to support the legal theories of the defense.
Over 300 scene photographs and hundreds of pages of official reports were reviewed. A review of the scene photographs indicates that the decedent was at the door when the knife attack began, and identifying the initial and ultimately fatal wounds. The altercation continued outside and then the decedent was placed back inside the entry way. By report the residence was secured at the time of law enforcement response.
The defendant had no injuries and no blood spatter on his person. The decedent had fallen into the exterior pool of blood at the time of arrest. With this exception, the only other blood spatter found on his person was on part of one leg exposed by shorts.
Independent investigation was unable to support the legal theories of the defense.
Wrongful Death - Police Use of Excessive Force (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent was involved in an altercation incident to arrest and died on scene. This agency was contacted prior to interment. The issue presented is if the injuries described and documented are consistent with those reported in law enforcement records and the official autopsy report. Moreover, are the injuries fatal, serious bodily injury or bodily injury; and within accepted police protocols for securing an arrestee. From the reports, the decedent and a co-habitant girlfriend were involved in an argument that was reported to have escalated to physical pushing. The decedent had a history of illicit drug use, recently having been sober for more than 30 days. In recent days he had relapsed and was in an excited and agitated state on this date. Neighbors called police and upon responding found the decedent and girlfriend in a heightened verbal argument. In attempting to separate them the decedent became combative. In reviewing the available limited police reports, it was determined that insufficient information was available. A forensic autopsy had been performed, but information was not immediately available to the family. Based upon our recommendation an assessment and documentation of the decedent was conducted with arrangements by the funeral home. Full photographs and documentation of clothing, injuries, absence of injuries and confirming no medical intervention – due to on scene death – was completed and confirmed. In the limited ability to review, the official investigation, including arrest procedures, were properly conducted. There was no physical or photographic evidence to evaluate. There was contextual evidence of pre-incident trauma, originating within the apartment, noted from the official reports. Upon examination in situ at the funeral home, there was noted extensive trauma, blunt and sharp force, literally from head to foot. Concentration of trauma, primarily blunt force, was noted on the head and upper extremities; the torso and lower extremities were less traumatic. Laceration and incised injuries were noted on the right eye lid, right hand and left thigh. The blunt force trauma contusions concentrated on the upper extremities and torso are consistent with law enforcement procedures of arrest control and baton use. Due to the potential of serious bodily injury or death, strikes to the head and face are banned in these protocols. The sharp force trauma, including to the right eye lid, right hand and left leg, are of unknown source and origin. No specific pattern injuries were observed.
Further investigation was pending release of the official records, reports and photographs, including the autopsy and toxicology reports. The cause of death was appropriately pended. Considerations of further investigation include the medical health of the decedent, toxicology level of methamphetamine, evaluation of injuries to the head and face, medical consequences of the electric muscle incapacitation (‘touch tase’) and findings from autopsy following further toxicology and histological microscopic examination.
All manners of death were to be considered. The family did not pursue this case any further.
Further investigation was pending release of the official records, reports and photographs, including the autopsy and toxicology reports. The cause of death was appropriately pended. Considerations of further investigation include the medical health of the decedent, toxicology level of methamphetamine, evaluation of injuries to the head and face, medical consequences of the electric muscle incapacitation (‘touch tase’) and findings from autopsy following further toxicology and histological microscopic examination.
All manners of death were to be considered. The family did not pursue this case any further.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by a private investigator on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent, a law enforcement officer, was found by his wife upon her return to the home. The official investigation was conducted by the decedent’s employing agency, who had jurisdiction.
By report there was a quarrel between the decedent and his wife, causing her to leave the home with her daughter for the evening. Upon her return she found the decedent. A black semi-automatic handgun, spent shell casing, cell phone, tactical flashlight and white cloth with blood, were found in the proximity of the decedent. Additional evidence at the scene included the decedent’s wallet and duty belt on the bed, with the handgun and tactical light removed from the respective holsters. Additional evidence included his cell phone, with a call and texting history that ended approximate to the estimated time-frame of death.
By report, the decedent had expressed being depressed and unhappy with his new position at the law enforcement agency. A family member reported a past incident of suicidal ideation; there were no other reports of this or any other incident. This same family member also reported the decedent as diagnosed with depression controlled by medication. No medications were reported and no medical history includes any reference to treatment, diagnosis or medications.
Analysis of the blood spatter on the decedent provides one possible, and unusual, manner in which the decedent could have held the handgun. This position was with the handgun held intraoral, upside down with the thumb operating the trigger.
Independent review of the official investigation determined that this was conducted properly and thoroughly. It should be noted that the investigation was primarily by one detective, and without the response or aid of the medical examiner’s investigator. According to the jurisdiction protocol, this was acceptable; however, by official death investigation standards it was not. The detective’s investigation was of such a positive standard that there was no negative impact from this lack of response.
Independent investigation determined that the finding of suicide by self-inflicted intraoral gunshot wound was consistent with the documented information, facts and evidence reviewed. This includes circumstances, decedent social history, photographs, and probable handgun position, blood spatter analysis and empirical circumstances. In addition, the ancillary reported information presents concern of suicidal ideation. This information includes alcohol intoxication, considerations of marital estrangement, proximate to his birthday, reported financial stress, reported job stress, historical and stated instant depression.
Independent investigation concurred with the official investigation. Therefore, the manner of death is supported as Suicide.
By report there was a quarrel between the decedent and his wife, causing her to leave the home with her daughter for the evening. Upon her return she found the decedent. A black semi-automatic handgun, spent shell casing, cell phone, tactical flashlight and white cloth with blood, were found in the proximity of the decedent. Additional evidence at the scene included the decedent’s wallet and duty belt on the bed, with the handgun and tactical light removed from the respective holsters. Additional evidence included his cell phone, with a call and texting history that ended approximate to the estimated time-frame of death.
By report, the decedent had expressed being depressed and unhappy with his new position at the law enforcement agency. A family member reported a past incident of suicidal ideation; there were no other reports of this or any other incident. This same family member also reported the decedent as diagnosed with depression controlled by medication. No medications were reported and no medical history includes any reference to treatment, diagnosis or medications.
Analysis of the blood spatter on the decedent provides one possible, and unusual, manner in which the decedent could have held the handgun. This position was with the handgun held intraoral, upside down with the thumb operating the trigger.
Independent review of the official investigation determined that this was conducted properly and thoroughly. It should be noted that the investigation was primarily by one detective, and without the response or aid of the medical examiner’s investigator. According to the jurisdiction protocol, this was acceptable; however, by official death investigation standards it was not. The detective’s investigation was of such a positive standard that there was no negative impact from this lack of response.
Independent investigation determined that the finding of suicide by self-inflicted intraoral gunshot wound was consistent with the documented information, facts and evidence reviewed. This includes circumstances, decedent social history, photographs, and probable handgun position, blood spatter analysis and empirical circumstances. In addition, the ancillary reported information presents concern of suicidal ideation. This information includes alcohol intoxication, considerations of marital estrangement, proximate to his birthday, reported financial stress, reported job stress, historical and stated instant depression.
Independent investigation concurred with the official investigation. Therefore, the manner of death is supported as Suicide.
Criminal Defense - Domestic Violence Assault (Expert Witness)
Our agency was retained by counsel on behalf of the defendant. The defendant was charged with assault causing bodily injury arising from a domestic argument. The victim reported to law enforcement 13 days post-incident and presented digital cell phone photographs (three) from the day following to the day of report. She also sent these images to the defendant via text message from the day of the first photograph. Her report to police and those in the text messages differed slightly, but not specific to the purpose of our consultation.
A scene investigation was not conducted as the apartment was no longer available. The defendant was able to return to the apartment, after vacated by the victim and with permission of the landlord, to photograph the area and doorway. This was after being charged and before hiring counsel.
It cannot be expected that a lay person will take appropriate forensic photographs – scale and no scale, overall perspective to specific injury. The images were of low quality and critical clarity of the images was missing. It was able to be determined the leg and location on the leg. With the exception of the dates on the text message, there was no confirming information as to the dates of the photographs – this information was not carried with the image when sent and law enforcement took photographs of the photographs on the cell phone; they did not perform a forensic cell phone data extraction. Defense agreed pre-trial that the images provided by the victim were of her leg and at the date and time in question. It was also agreed that the images provided by the defendant were of the apartment and doorway.
The victim alleged that the defendant repeatedly kicked her while she was supine on the floor. The defendant alleged that the defendant had placed her leg in the door while he was leaving the apartment.
In reviewing the photograph depicting a prominent contusion and best clarity, there were multiple contusions of possibly more than two actions; there are two primary and distinct linear contusions, roughly “L”-shaped; or four linear contusions – one set of two linear abrasions intersecting with a set of two linear abrasions, forming an “L”-shape.
The injuries were inconsistent with being struck by a kick. Specifically, the contusions are not uniform, as would be expected with a foot strike as described. Pattern injuries from a kick or similar strike tend to be more circular to oval, and not linear, with concentration contusion discoloring due to a concentrated impact and peripheral surface hemorrhaging of the capillaries. It was therefore opined that there was a strong probability the injuries were not inflicted as described.
The injuries were consistent with multiple impacts by an object and the leg moving. This could occur by the door under specific circumstances – such as the leg bent at the knee and shut in the apartment door. There were some unique patterns that corresponded to defects in the door molding and trim. It was therefore opined that there was a strong probability the injuries were inflicted as described by the Defendant.
A scene investigation was not conducted as the apartment was no longer available. The defendant was able to return to the apartment, after vacated by the victim and with permission of the landlord, to photograph the area and doorway. This was after being charged and before hiring counsel.
It cannot be expected that a lay person will take appropriate forensic photographs – scale and no scale, overall perspective to specific injury. The images were of low quality and critical clarity of the images was missing. It was able to be determined the leg and location on the leg. With the exception of the dates on the text message, there was no confirming information as to the dates of the photographs – this information was not carried with the image when sent and law enforcement took photographs of the photographs on the cell phone; they did not perform a forensic cell phone data extraction. Defense agreed pre-trial that the images provided by the victim were of her leg and at the date and time in question. It was also agreed that the images provided by the defendant were of the apartment and doorway.
The victim alleged that the defendant repeatedly kicked her while she was supine on the floor. The defendant alleged that the defendant had placed her leg in the door while he was leaving the apartment.
In reviewing the photograph depicting a prominent contusion and best clarity, there were multiple contusions of possibly more than two actions; there are two primary and distinct linear contusions, roughly “L”-shaped; or four linear contusions – one set of two linear abrasions intersecting with a set of two linear abrasions, forming an “L”-shape.
The injuries were inconsistent with being struck by a kick. Specifically, the contusions are not uniform, as would be expected with a foot strike as described. Pattern injuries from a kick or similar strike tend to be more circular to oval, and not linear, with concentration contusion discoloring due to a concentrated impact and peripheral surface hemorrhaging of the capillaries. It was therefore opined that there was a strong probability the injuries were not inflicted as described.
The injuries were consistent with multiple impacts by an object and the leg moving. This could occur by the door under specific circumstances – such as the leg bent at the knee and shut in the apartment door. There were some unique patterns that corresponded to defects in the door molding and trim. It was therefore opined that there was a strong probability the injuries were inflicted as described by the Defendant.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by a private investigator on behalf of the decedent’s family. The decedent, a male in his early 20s, was transported by ambulance to the emergency room, presenting with an apparent illicit multi-drug overdose. After autopsy, and negative toxicology, his death was ruled Natural due to specified heart disease.
Prior to calling 911, friends reported that he had taken multiple illicit drugs, including ecstasy and psilocybin mushrooms - both of which are not in routine autopsy toxicology and have accelerated metabolic properties in blood specimens. Moreover, persons involved in the incident and reporting did not relate pertinent information to law enforcement, and the investigation was limited until after the autopsy, with subsequent findings not reported to the forensic pathologist. Of importance, was that two friends bound the decedent by his hands and feet, and then together, lying him prone on the floor. This was done in an attempt to calm him down and keep him restrained. After being observed in respiratory arrest, 911 was called.
Investigation determined that the official investigation was deficient due to appropriate follow-up and incomplete statements by the decedent's friends. We were unable to provide a medical opinion and cannot expand on the official cause of death related to heart disease. However, in the absence of the incident circumstances in this otherwise unexplained death, this medical diagnosis would be plausible.
Presently and pending further official investigation, it is recommended the Cause of Death be recertified as ‘positional asphyxia due to an immobilizing restraint and multi-drug toxicity’; and the Manner of Death as ‘Accident’.
This Manner and Cause of Death are due to the peri-mortem ‘hog tying’ restraining of the hands to the ankles following a ‘sleeper hold’ to incapacitate the decedent and cease an episode of drug induced hyper-erratic behavior and possible excited delirium.
Prior to calling 911, friends reported that he had taken multiple illicit drugs, including ecstasy and psilocybin mushrooms - both of which are not in routine autopsy toxicology and have accelerated metabolic properties in blood specimens. Moreover, persons involved in the incident and reporting did not relate pertinent information to law enforcement, and the investigation was limited until after the autopsy, with subsequent findings not reported to the forensic pathologist. Of importance, was that two friends bound the decedent by his hands and feet, and then together, lying him prone on the floor. This was done in an attempt to calm him down and keep him restrained. After being observed in respiratory arrest, 911 was called.
Investigation determined that the official investigation was deficient due to appropriate follow-up and incomplete statements by the decedent's friends. We were unable to provide a medical opinion and cannot expand on the official cause of death related to heart disease. However, in the absence of the incident circumstances in this otherwise unexplained death, this medical diagnosis would be plausible.
Presently and pending further official investigation, it is recommended the Cause of Death be recertified as ‘positional asphyxia due to an immobilizing restraint and multi-drug toxicity’; and the Manner of Death as ‘Accident’.
This Manner and Cause of Death are due to the peri-mortem ‘hog tying’ restraining of the hands to the ankles following a ‘sleeper hold’ to incapacitate the decedent and cease an episode of drug induced hyper-erratic behavior and possible excited delirium.
Suspicious Death - Independent Investigation (Expert Consultation)
Our agency was retained by the decedent’s family. The decedent, a female in her early 20s, was found by her boyfriend and a roommate, hanging fully suspended from a tree.
By report there was a quarrel between the decedent and her boyfriend, alcohol having been consumed. The family did not report that multiple independent investigations had been conducted, and there was multi-generational animosity between the families. The family reported seeing visible fingerprint and hand impressions on the neck and throat of the decedent and requested they be identified and submitted for suspect identification. They also requested that a government agency be contacted to release satellite images of the incident that would show their daughter being killed and identify the killers. Conclusions the family had reached were based primarily on independent research using popular search engines.
By report, the decedent had expressed being depressed and unhappy with her recent move and relationship. A note indicating suicide was found in the home and the notebook in her vehicle. An autopsy was performed and the death ruled a Suicide by hanging. Toxicology revealed a low level of alcohol intoxication. There was one unconfirmed report of recent suicidal ideation. There was no other contributing medical or social history.
Independent review of the official investigation, including conferring with a fingerprint identification expert, the responding law enforcement officer, and one of the forensic pathologists retained by the family, was conducted. The official investigation was conducted properly and thoroughly. It should be noted that the investigation was primarily by one patrol officer, and with the response and initial scene assistance of the medical examiner’s investigator.
Independent investigation determined that the finding of suicide by hanging wound was consistent with the documented information, facts and evidence reviewed. This includes circumstances, decedent social history, photographs, and ligature impressions. In addition, the ancillary reported information presents concern of suicidal ideation. This information includes alcohol intoxication, and considerations of estrangement.
Independent investigation concurred with the official investigation. Therefore, the manner of death is supported as Suicide.
By report there was a quarrel between the decedent and her boyfriend, alcohol having been consumed. The family did not report that multiple independent investigations had been conducted, and there was multi-generational animosity between the families. The family reported seeing visible fingerprint and hand impressions on the neck and throat of the decedent and requested they be identified and submitted for suspect identification. They also requested that a government agency be contacted to release satellite images of the incident that would show their daughter being killed and identify the killers. Conclusions the family had reached were based primarily on independent research using popular search engines.
By report, the decedent had expressed being depressed and unhappy with her recent move and relationship. A note indicating suicide was found in the home and the notebook in her vehicle. An autopsy was performed and the death ruled a Suicide by hanging. Toxicology revealed a low level of alcohol intoxication. There was one unconfirmed report of recent suicidal ideation. There was no other contributing medical or social history.
Independent review of the official investigation, including conferring with a fingerprint identification expert, the responding law enforcement officer, and one of the forensic pathologists retained by the family, was conducted. The official investigation was conducted properly and thoroughly. It should be noted that the investigation was primarily by one patrol officer, and with the response and initial scene assistance of the medical examiner’s investigator.
Independent investigation determined that the finding of suicide by hanging wound was consistent with the documented information, facts and evidence reviewed. This includes circumstances, decedent social history, photographs, and ligature impressions. In addition, the ancillary reported information presents concern of suicidal ideation. This information includes alcohol intoxication, and considerations of estrangement.
Independent investigation concurred with the official investigation. Therefore, the manner of death is supported as Suicide.
Click the business card to download:
