If you go to http://www.forensicauto.net, you will see all sorts of bragging as to how these people have over 300 years of experience and how great they are.

Hey, I am all for success and pride of doing a job well done, but here is another example of the problems with the coalition's members.

Granted, this information is old, but it is very relevant because Mr. Miller was very defensive about it on the stand last year when crossed on it with the case Nobels vs Ampac Insurance in Alabama.

Of course I may be a little sensitive too, if the judge called me a "free-lance private fire investigator who was paid thousands of dollars to conduct an investigation, so that he could come into court and make a careless and unsupported statements concerning the source of the fire and that accelerants were used in starting the fire. This individual so far as the court is concerned was not credible or believable."

The judges comments referred to testimony by Herbert Miller of Indianapolis.

This case went backwards for Mr. Miller's client for $2.75 million dollars.

Here is the point: They preach one method for others to do and they do what they want in the Coalition.

They attack me for exposing them. They use lies and innuendo and I supply supported fact.

Right now they say they will not indulge in recognizing who the coalition is writing about. It makes them look like they are chasing ghosts!

I have other versions of this case from the "Indiana Trial Lawyer." Yes, it is difficult to read and I addressed the main language of the judge's decision.

You can blow it up and print it--

Buy the way, if you look at the fax# of 000000000 it means it came from another coalition member some years before.

 IASIU (International Association of Special Investigation Units) most recent quarterly magazine "Awareness" there is an article about how experienced the members of the Coalition of Forensic Examiners is.

This site addresses the truth about these members. As I keep stating as well, this is not a war, but an in depth amount of information that gives you the opportunity to make an informed decision before assigning them an examination.

They attack me personally with blatant lies and half-truths and yet will not state who they are ranting about. The reason is, if they direct anyone to this site it exposes them as to what they really are.

Please keep in mind, that this is just the tip of the iceberg being released right now and we have much, much more. I am not stating anything other than fact about Mr. Miller on this page. The judge is the one that said he was "unbelievable", not me.

Here is the article that was just published:

Coalition Network of Forensic Examiners Formed

By Mangine, Robert

Forensic Examiners (CNFE)

was formed in 2007 and is

dedicated to all disciplines of

automotive forensic examinations. The

CNFE is composed of the oldest, largest,

and most respected companies and

individuals that specialize in automotive

forensics. With the originating members

having a combined total of almost 300

years of acquired skills, the Coalition

collectively represents the most extensive

pool of knowledge, experience and proficiency

in the industry.

Having realized there was no functioning

professional organization dedicated

exclusively to automotive forensic

examinations, the Charter Members of

the CNFE accepted the core mission of

promoting, publishing, and adhering

to proven standards and procedures; to

develop, refine, and peer review new

standards and procedures consistent

with the constantly changing automotive

industry; to establish comprehensive

training guidelines, and to foster and

maintain a strict code of professional

ethics. Although still in its infancy, the

CNFE has already evolved (by request)

into reviewing, testing, or evaluating

new, questionable, or unsubstantiated

claims, methods, and/or procedures as

they relate to automotive forensic examinations;

and to share that information

with others in the industry.

The Coalition Network of Forensic

Examiners also accepts associate members

from the legal community, those

who possess specific technical knowledge,

or other individuals where the

exchange of information would be

mutually beneficial.

When an active member of the

CNFE accepts an assignment from a

client, it is with the clear understanding

that there is an equal amount of responsibility

for all sides involved, be it the

vehicle driver/insured, or law enforcement/

insurance companies. Every

examination, without exception, must

be performed in a professional, objective,

competent, and consistent manner.

CNFE active members operate under

the basic premise that a professional

forensic examiner cannot make any

conclusions or testify to anything unless

they physically examine something.

The CNFE does not collect dues

from its members and does not charge

for information. Membership is open

to any company or individual who possesses

the training, qualifications, or

experience required, who is recommended

by an existing member, and who has

an understanding of the importance of

continuing education.

Active members of the coalition

are committed to providing services and

support in an unbiased and objective

manner. The members are independent

companies and individuals who establish

their own fee schedules, administrative

policies, and procedures. Client selection

is solely at the discretion of each member.

There are certainly no rules, either

stated or implied, that would prevent

or discourage one member from professionally

opposing another.

The Coalition Network of Forensic

Examiners web site is currently available,

although still under construction. There

are no restrictions on who may view the

site, and everyone is welcome at www.

forensicauto.net.

On a case which I opposed Mr. Miller in Las Vegas (Baca vs. CSAA) he stated in his report that the ignition lock revealed no signs of blunt force trauma. He also stated in the report there was no signs of stripping in this theft recovered vehicle with only a passenger compartment fire. The paint on the exterior of the doors was not burned. Mr. Miller and the insurance rep with the insurance attorney were present at the time of my examination. With me was the client attorney.

The insurance side was chuckling and making jokes. I noticed one minor problem in Mr. Miller's report and showed my client attorney. There was in fact, stripping--The seats, trim panels and headliner had been removed before the fire! The seat studs were exposed missing the hold down nuts! The case was settled immediately for the insured.

Look, we are all human and we can make mistakes, however this was obvious! There was no fuel load in the vehicle.

Be very careful when picking a firm for forensic exams. Words are cheap and don't be fooled by self-serving ads promoting to be so experienced in the field.

Can they support their conclusions with fact?

When working for the insurance company; was the vehicle physically examined?

When opining on a totally burned vehicle with a transponder; can they support the fact that the vehicle was last operated with a properly coded transponder key? Word of warning--90% they can't and you don't want to find this out in court!

We review these reports for accuracy and give the merits and the problems, so that you can send the report back to the expert and have the issues addressed before the case goes to court.

HOME