|
|
| Key
Pathway Microscopic Examination |
||
|
|
You can obtain an overview of Key Pathway on a CD. This overview
will answer many of your questions about Key Pathway Analysis.
Click here
|
|
Page Contents: |
|||
|
[Letter from NETS to all Clients RE: Anderson v. Premier Ins] |
|||
|
Key Pathway Microscopic Examination |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
The key pathway microscopic examination is a process that exceeds any borescope examination into the interior of any lock components whether it pertains to a vehicle, residential or other type of lock. It is an examination which does not end with the analysis of the interior lock components as It also includes a microscopic examination of the keys. It is the type of examination that will result in providing our clients with all available physical evidence present on the examined components. The compilation of factual data, as well as an analysis of those facts, are accomplished objectively and truthfully. The basic methodology is one of a systematic approach and attention is focused on all relevant details. Key Pathway is a multi-step process that is not solely dedicated to the determination of the last key used.
|
|||
CASE #1 May 23, 2000 Key Pathway examinations have been judicially endorsed as admissible. In Tennessee Circuit Court in Memphis, Tennessee on May 23, 2000, after a lengthy Daubert hearing, the Judge held Richard Pacheco had the "knowledge, skill, experience, training, and education" to testify and that the key pathway analysis would "substantially assist" the jury in considering whether the car in question was actually stolen. The Tennessee rule on the admissibility of expert testimony as actually more stringent than the federal rule under Daubert because the expert testimony under Tennessee's rules must substantially assist the trier of fact. Through testimony, photographs, and diagrams, the process was explained, and under went cross-examination of opposing counsel and the close scrutiny of the Judge. The court admitted the testimony and affirmatively stated it met all applicable evidentiary and expert testimony standards. After a two and one half day trial the jury deliberated for one and a half hours and ruled in favor of the insurance company and further found the plaintiff/insured had acted in bad faith. The case is Charmaine J. Jones vs.
Allstate Insurance Company, Docket No. 88888-3 T.D., Circuit Court of Shelby
County (Memphis), Tennessee. Copies of the hearing transcript can be
obtained from Michael P. Mills of MILLS & COOPER in Nashville Tennessee
(615) 221-8218, who represented Allstate. CASE # 2 June 20, 2000For
the second time in a month Key Pathway Micro Examinations have been judicially
endorsed as evidence admissible under the Daubert standard. On June 20, 2000 a plaintiff’s attorney after being
given the Daubert decision rendered in the Jones vs. Allstate case changed her
tactics and requested a Daubert hearing on the process leading to the Key
Pathway examination. The
judge revisited the Key Pathway process and then visited the entire process from
examination and collection of the evidence at the scene to the Micro examination
(Key Pathway). The
Judge ruled again that the entire process was admissible under the Daubert
standards. N.E.T.S.
is now the only company that we know of that has had its entire process from
the scene exam to the lab exam endorsed as admissible under the Daubert
standard. Latest Court Decision for our side; The
United States District Court of Western District of Kentucky, Louisville
Division rendered an order on January 22, 2001 in favor of State Farm Insurance
Company and their experts using the Daubert Standard and Rule 702 of the Federal
Rules of Evidence. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kathie
Ducharme, President Send request via e-mail mailto:Rick@netsexam.com
For Information on the requirements Daubert click here |
| Letter
from Dr. Gregory A. Robertshaw PhD.
June 26, 1999 To Whom It May Concern: I, Gregory A. Robertshaw, am currently employed as a lead engineer at MITRE Corporation in Bedford, MA. My educational credentials include a B.S. from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and an M.S. and PhD in Physics from Brown University. I am very familiar with scientific method, simulation, and analysis. While I have know of the work of North Eastern Technical Services (NETS) for several years, more recently I have had the opportunity to review the process by which keys and locks are examined in order to ascertain certain facts concerning the means by which locks are operated and/or defeated. For example, one can, in many circumstances, determine the characteristics of a key that was used to operate an automobile prior to its theft or destruction. From my review I have concluded the following: 1. NETS has a competent and experienced technical staff. 2. NETS has demonstrated, via well-controlled experiments, the efficacy of their proprietary key-path analysis techniques. 3. The key-path analysis techniques are founded on sound physical principles that can be understood by any intelligent layman. 4. While physical evidence may not always be sufficient to arrive at a specific key-path determination, when such evidence does exist, conclusions can be reached with high confidence. Overall, I am impressed with the professionalism of the NETS staff and the advances they have forged in Forensic Science. Sincerely, Dr. Gregory A. Robertshaw
|
|
Letter from NETS to all Clients RE: Anderson v. Premier Ins To be published soon |