Welcome
Expert witness work in forensic image comparison, forensic age estimation, skeletal identification, and measurement image data and conversions.
The practice works primarily for courts, public prosecutors’ offices, police authorities, administrative fine authorities, and other public bodies, as well as for lawyers. A clear evidential question, suitable material, and an assessment grounded in specialist methodology are what matter most. Expert work should remain understandable to the non-specialist and reviewable by the specialist. This includes the preliminary review of the material, the written expert report, and—where required—the oral explanation at the hearing.
Useful for an initial review: type of proceedings, specific evidential question, available image material, comparison images, and a short case summary or file extract.
Anthropological image comparison in judicial and administrative proceedings on the basis of traceable feature analysis.
Whether the available material can carry a professional conclusion depends on recognisability, comparability, and the actual evidential reach of the images.
Expert assessment of statutory age questions in living persons within the legally permissible scope of examination.
The assessment focuses on age thresholds, the overall findings, and a restrained evaluation of what those findings allow.
Anthropological examination of human skeletal remains, bone finds and osteological comparison findings for identification purposes.
Central issues are the state of preservation, the biological profile, comparison material, and the proper handling of the finding and recovery situation.
Technical preparation of measurement image data through decryption, export, and traceable provision in usable form.
The technical conversion remains separate from the actual expert report, but it may be a prerequisite for later specialist assessment.
Expert witness work for courts · Methodological basis
The assessment requires a clear separation between technical preparation, material review, and the actual specialist evaluation. Not every image is suitable for identity assessment. Not every comparison image allows the same degree of feature comparison, and not every question permits the same scope of conclusion. Limits of the material are stated expressly. The examination is grounded in traceable morphological feature analysis and not in the uncritical adoption of automated facial recognition or other black-box procedures. The expert conclusion is therefore formulated as a verbally reasoned statement of probability and not as an appearance of mathematical exactness unsupported by the underlying data.
The assessment takes account of image quality, perspective, comparability, occlusion, preselection, and limits of inference. The evaluation steps are justified in writing and clearly distinguished from a mere preliminary review or a suitability review.
Expert witness work for courts · Contact and case material
For an initial enquiry, four pieces of information are usually sufficient: type of proceedings, specific evidential question, brief overview of the available material, and the form in which that material exists. This includes original files, exports, printouts, sequences, radiological records or other comparison findings, as well as information on preselection, witness nomination or prior identification. A court order, written instruction or brief file extract is helpful where procedurally available.
This makes it possible at an early stage to clarify whether the material supports the evidential question and whether the next step should be technical preparation, a suitability review, or a more extensive expert assessment.
