“It is not what you know or what you think you know, it is what you can prove.”
Collision Reconstruction: Collision reconstruction is the process of determining from physical evidence, how the collision occurred, not why. Reconstruction includes reporting and evidence collection, data collection, technical follow-up, professional reconstruction and cause analysis. Limitations impacting effective reconstruction include information quality and availability, lost or unidentified witnesses, poor photographs, time and costs. Delays in reporting, collection of evidence and witness statements reduce the effectiveness of reconstruction. Most important is the availability of the vehicles involved.
Based on the available physical evidence, reconstruction can provide estimates of speed, force and acceleration/deceleration experienced during a collision, provide time-distance analyses and calculation, as well as reconstruct the sequence of events leading to the collision and its aftermath. At scene measuring, mapping, photographing, preserving and/or collecting physical evidence such as tire skid and scuffmarks, roadway scrapes and gouges, vehicle deformation and crush, occupant/pedestrian injury patterns are all critical components of reconstruction. Questions of speed, who saw what when, reaction time, vehicle placement prior to impact, and direction of travel are frequently asked questions requiring reconstruction.
Mark A. Ward
Audio Enhancement: Analog and digital recordings can be problematic, especially audio from video. Frequently, the spoken word is too soft, background noise is too loud, music covers the conversation or the entire recording is covered by noise. Audio enhancement can help resolve this problem. The clanking of dishes and silverware in a restaurant, music, air conditioning, background noise such as traffic, kids, trains and machinery can be reduced so the spoken word can be intelligible. This can be critical in making your case. A recent murder confession was recovered resulting in a conviction demonstrated the importance of good recording as well as the need for forensic audio enhancement.
Audio enhancement is done in our own studio utilizing audio equipment in conjunction with computer programs for equalization. The process includes increasing the frequencies of the human voice and reducing the background noise and interference. Audio processing removes the bass and high end of recordings because the human voice frequencies are not as strong in this frequency range. Unless requested otherwise, we do not make changes to the audio except to enhance the clarity of the spoken words. No modification, substituting or alterations of spoken words by the involved persons is done to the original recording. You are provided with an unaltered original as provided and a enhanced copy.
Enhancement is only half of the process. Proper documentation and testimony is required to get your evidence into court. Our technician can testify as to the process employed to enhance your recording. We can also provide “on the stand” audio and video demonstrations of the process. Documentation of each step provides the ability to fully replicate the enhancement process by a third party. We can provide an expert witness to audio enhancement.
Testimonial: “Time after time, you work magic on the recordings by removing background noise, which then enables me to hear and understand what the speakers are saying. Not only do you continually do an excellent job on the quality of the recordings, but I am regulary suprised at how quickly and efficiently you are able to accomplish these tasks. The work you have done for me has allowed juries to understand and evaluate what the speakers are saying so they could make a determination on whether a number of different defendants are guilty of the crimes they were charged. Your work has contributed to ensuring that justice is done and to making sure that extremely dangerous criminals are behind bars for the rest of their lives.” Ann L. Bramsen, Esquire
Testimonial: “Mark Ward’s hard work resulted in a significantly improved and clear rendition of the original recording. The audio enhancement to the original recording allowed the jury to clearly hear the defendant make several damning admissions including “‘I was just sticking (stabbing) the fool.'” and “‘I killed someone.” Ronald Zonen, Esquire
Testimonial: “Twenty sections of the video and audio were presented in the Santa Barbara Superior Court and the entire process was explained to the jury. Certain selected video and audio sections were used by the prosecution in their closing argument and were instrumental in the finding of guilty on October 14, 2008. The defendant was ultimately sentenced to 17 years in state prison.” Hilary Dozer, Esquire
Ordo ab Chao