Does Your Lawyer Understand Metrology, or the Science of Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Forensic Measurements?

by Bell Law Firm

If I told you that a trial lawyer in a criminal or personal injury case must be equipped to understand Forensic Metrology, laymen would look at you as if you had two heads and a lawyer who did not understand it would dismiss the notion entirely.[1]

In our law offices we constantly contend with these issues, particularly in the area of vehicular collisions. I am a Founding Member of the National College of DUI Defense from Tennessee, and as such I occasionally review the listserv on questions about car wrecks and accident reconstruction. However, I am not an engineer, nor have I had any specialized mathematical training other than what I learned in elementary school, high school and college business classes. But, what I learned, I learned well and use it virtually every day. Recently, there has been a great deal of discussion about the importance of being able to explain complex scientific principals involving mathematical formulas in a manner in a manner that allows the juror to apply those principals to the facts of a given case. Of note, those principals apply in both the civil and criminal arena.

A common example that arises is when a defendant driver claims they attempted to stop their vehicle before rear-ending one of our clients, when in fact they were texting or were otherwise distracted and never applied the brakes. To prove that the driver never applied their brakes, we would have to explain the principal “coefficient of friction”. If we were to merely read the jury the scientific definition of this principal,[2] most would be instantly confused and we would risk not making our case effectively.

Rather, because the attorneys in this firm are familiar with the scientific concept and the mathematical applications, we can explain the same situation very simply by analogy or example to allow the average juror to understand how the complex scientific principal applies to a regular rear-end collision. Instead of merely parroting the scientific definition, we would explain the concept like this: “When your car is moving at normal speed on the highway, your car creates minimal friction with the road, hence the reason you don’t see skid-marks trailing behind you when driving down the interstate. However, if the brakes are applied suddenly (as happens when someone is trying to prevent rear-ending another driver), the friction between your tires and the road increases because the force of the car’s momentum is confronted by the resistance of your brakes. This confrontation, or friction, is reflected in the skid-marks you see behind your car after a sudden stop.”

So to return to our rear-end collision example, after explaining the relationship between skid-marks and attempting to stop suddenly, we would point to the lack of skid-marks as evidence of the fact that the driver was distracted and therefore never saw our client come to a stop in front of her. In this way, we explain the basic premise of coefficient of friction without getting bogged down in unnecessary scientific jargon.

As my colleague from Wisconsin notes, “we see forensic laboratories fighting against the new paradigm of uncertainty analysis, preferring to admit no possibility of uncertainty, and even confessing margins of error only begrudgingly”. Forensic scientists frequently appear so knowledgeable and official that the average layperson will believe what they are presenting is absolute fact when their conclusion is anything but.  Being able to both use scientific evidence in your favor and confront faulty scientific evidence for the benefit of the client is not only crucial, it is essential. If your lawyer has no experience in these forensic methods of measurements and one item of forensic proof is to be offered, your chances of an effective examination of the scientist witness will be as likely as a “Hail Mary” in a football game.[3] But trials are not games – they are life changers for not only the client, but also their families. In our next post, we will discuss how the same principals and skills are equally or more important in the criminal context as they are in civil suits. We hope you come back to learn a little more.

 James A.H. Bell is the founder of Law Offices of James A.H. Bell P.C  in Knoxville, TN. Mr. Bell has over 40 years of experience in both criminal and civil litigation and may be contacted by calling 865-637-2900 or by email at jbell@jamesahbell.com. The Bell Law Firm: Client Focused, Court Room Proven.

[1] My three hour presentation on accident reconstruction covers all the geometry, physics, and other mathematical equations that a lawyer would need to know in civil and criminal cases. That presentation has been presented to numerous state and national bar association groups and has been very well received, despite its seemingly boring subject matter

[2]The coefficient of friction is a dimensionless scalar value which describes the ratio of the force of friction between two bodies and the force pressing them together.

[3] And Doug Flutie ain’t walkin’ through that courthouse door.