Should experts do forensic engineering investigative work for free?\u00a0 Would this jeopardize\u00a0their objectivity or the justice system’s perception of it? (Ref. 1)<\/p>\n
I have concluded that, in general, we\u00a0should not and yes it would.<\/p>\n
A possible exception would be a financially strapped\u00a0client who otherwise might not have access to the justice system.<\/p>\n
This question came up recently during lunch with a colleague who\u00a0had referred an\u00a0Atlantic Canada\u00a0legal aid group to me.\u00a0\u00a0One of their clients\u00a0had a problem the cause of which\u00a0my colleague\u00a0recognized was more in my area of expertise to investigate than his.<\/p>\n
I was contacted by a student lawyer with the legal aid group and called to a meeting. \u00a0I was told by\u00a0an administrator almost before I could sit down, “We don’t have much money..!!\u00a0 What’s your fee?”<\/p>\n
I told them my hourly fee and also referred them to the Fees page on my website. www.ericjorden.com\/fees<\/a>\u00a0 My schedule of fees is comparable to other senior professional engineers\u00a0practicing forensic engineering\u00a0in eastern Canada and, for that matter, elsewhere in Canada and the U.S.<\/p>\n They briefed me on the problem – an environmental failure, experienced by their client, the plaintiff.\u00a0 Also that they had a court date about six weeks\u00a0hence.<\/p>\n One of their biggest\u00a0problems – aside from the tight court schedule, was that they did not know the precise location of the structure\u00a0alleged to have caused\u00a0the failure.\u00a0 The location\u00a0was critical to determining\u00a0if the structure was the cause.<\/p>\n I outlined some of the tasks I would need to carry out in a forensic engineering investigation – including first locating the structure. (Ref. 2)<\/p>\n They said they would get back to me but I haven’t heard from them since.<\/p>\n Should I have said I would do the work pro bono<\/em> instead of stating my fee?<\/p>\n In discussing this later with my colleague, he noted, “You’re doing the work for free for one<\/strong> party.\u00a0 How is that different from doing the work for a fee for one<\/strong> party?”\u00a0 He’s done work pro bono<\/em> for the clients of this legal aid group feeling, “I should put back\u00a0into the community”.<\/p>\n But we’re not doing\u00a0the work\u00a0for one party, we’re doing\u00a0the work\u00a0for the justice system.\u00a0 The one party is paying\u00a0an expert to\u00a0gather technical evidence to be submitted to the court.\u00a0 Also\u00a0to explain the technical findings\u00a0to the judge and\u00a0jury, and to the counsel for the parties involved.\u00a0 And to do this objectively, thoroughly, and reliably.\u00a0 The justice system’s requirements\u00a0for the expert to be objective are very clear.\u00a0 There are\u00a0no qualifications on this objectivity. (Ref. 3)<\/p>\n But the justice system represents the community’s interests.\u00a0 Shouldn’t we from time to time put back into the community?<\/p>\n We must do this but not in this forum.\u00a0\u00a0The justice system’s understanding of where we are expected to come from as experts affects their perception of our actions.\u00a0 Lawyers are expected to be subjective and advocate on behalf of the client.\u00a0 Experts\u00a0are expected to be objective and advocate on behalf of the truth.<\/p>\n In our society, doing something for free for someone tends to imply a closeness that would not be\u00a0acceptable for an expert in forensic work, even if the closeness is only slight.\u00a0 There is the implication that we want to help someone when the clear implication should be that we want to\u00a0help the court.\u00a0 The requirement that we ‘stay at arm’s length’ is compromised.\u00a0 If there’s any uncertainty at all about the objectivity\u00a0of\u00a0the relationship between the expert and the client there’s risk of being perceived as biased to the\u00a0client’s interests.<\/p>\n We pay for goods and services in our society.\u00a0 We can’t get away from\u00a0that.\u00a0 And you get what you pay for.<\/p>\n “Perception is extremely important.”,\u00a0noted Alan E. Mitchell, a former lawyer in private practice and former Nova Scotia Minister of Justice.\u00a0 Alan was of this opinion in\u00a0a recent discussion I had with\u00a0him about the Senate and\u00a0Rob Ford\u00a0scandals.\u00a0 Perception applies across the board in human affairs.<\/p>\n We as experts\u00a0must not\u00a0do pro bono<\/em> work – as a rule,\u00a0even if we might want to as community minded citizens.<\/p>\n References<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Should experts do forensic engineering investigative work for free?\u00a0 Would this jeopardize\u00a0their objectivity or the justice system’s perception of it? (Ref. 1) I have concluded that, in general, we\u00a0should not and yes it would. A possible exception would be a … Continue reading \n