How We Work

Methodology & Process

Court-tested frameworks and a disciplined engagement process that withstand Daubert scrutiny.

Methodology

Frameworks & Standards

Every analysis is grounded in peer-reviewed, field-tested frameworks that withstand Daubert scrutiny.

Analysis aligned with Federal Rule of Evidence 702, ensuring testimony meets the relevance and reliability thresholds set by federal courts.

Premises security and risk assessment evaluated against the standards and guidelines published by ASIS International.

Threat assessment and management aligned with the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals best practice guidelines.

Behavioral progression model used to identify warning behaviors and pre-incident indicators along the pathway to targeted violence.

Workplace Assessment of Violence Risk — a 21-item structured professional judgment instrument for evaluating workplace and targeted violence risk.

The FBI Crisis Negotiation Unit framework (BISM) for de-escalation and behavioral change through staged active listening, empathy, and rapport.

Engagement Process

A confidential conversation to determine the scope, identify conflicts, and confirm subject-matter fit.

Detailed review of pleadings, depositions, incident reports, audio and videos, and discovery to build the framework for opinions.

A Rule 26-compliant report stating opinions, methodology, and the bases for opinions, written for clarity under cross-examination.

Rigorous rebuttal of opposing experts — identifying methodological gaps, theoretical weaknesses, and unsupported conclusions.

Confident, prepared testimony that withstands aggressive cross-examination at deposition and at trial.