What is a forensic expert? A person who is qualified to testify in a court of justice.
Forensic means "Belonging to courts of justice." Blacks Law Dictionary, (6th Ed.) 1991
Court witnesses with experience, specifically litigation experience, are proven to be an excellent resource when youre preparing for trial and when assessing for risks. In his 18 years of service, there aren’t very many topics pertaining to court that Mr. Jensen hasn’t consulted or assisted in the preparation of trial.
IN CIVIL CASES: You do not want your case to be a learning process. Mr. Jensen offers free initial consultations. He is willing to review your evidence, and your case for merit and procedural integrity. If you want your day in trial, you must have correct pleadings and you must be able to demonstrate that there are disputed facts existing or an issue in controversy.
IN CRIMINAL CASES: Can you really afford to be guessing? Courts do not entertain motions based on speculation. You must demonstrate to the judge that genuine facts exist before you can request a hearing before the judge. The hearings are not designed to be a tool for discovery purposes. Mr. Jensen can give you those facts and since he has litigation experience, he knows what facts the judge would be looking for.
In other words, you have nothing to lose by contacting Mr. Jensen for a free consultation.
Mr. Jensen is experienced/college-trained, and proficient at conducting investigations in the following areas:
ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION & FAILURE ANALYSIS
Crime reconstruction typically starts with inductive reasoning, then proceeds to deductive reasoning, then involves a breaking down or analysis of facts, and then involves a building up of facts or synthesis. The number and kind of facts, together with any ambiguity or doubt associated with them, determine the level of evidentiary value. The process is almost exactly the same as the scientific method:
Step 1 -- State the problem by looking at what type of crime was committed, the legal elements of the crime, and the characteristics of the jurisdiction where the crime was committed
Step 2 -- Form a hypothesis by looking at the physical evidence and interviewing the victim or witnesses to determine motive and possible suspects
Step 3 -- Collect data by doing records checks and police checks, re-interviewing the victim, witnesses, and suspects, while trying to obtain additional witnesses and exemplar or comparison samples from suspects
Step 4 -- Test hypotheses by evaluating how truthful and reliable the stories are of each party to the crime, and weigh their stories against the physical evidence and any known physical laws that could possibly reinterpret the physical evidence
Step 5 -- Follow up on the most promising hypotheses (theories) with any and all procedures (e.g., surveillance, stings) that might prove or disprove a particular suspect is the offender
Step 6 -- Draw conclusions that are supported by court-admissible evidence leading to the arrest, prosecution, and conviction of the offender.
The conclusions of a crime reconstruction should take one of four (4) forms about the sequence of events: (1) it can be shown to have occurred in a given manner; (2) it can be shown to have likely occurred in a given manner; (3) it can be shown to have unlikely occurred in a given manner; or (4) it cannot be shown to have occurred in a given manner. The following table adapted from Osterburg & Ward (2000) relates these levels of certainty to legally admissible levels of proof:
Contact Mr. Jensen for a free consultation.
Criminal defense and civil court cases are supported by cell phone, text message and laptop computer evidence. Jensen Private Investigations has the experience and tools for retrieving digital information through Cell Phone Analysis and Digital / Computer Forensics to use in a court of law. Click on the link for more information.
Consultations are Free and Confidential
Salt Lake City