CompuServe Messages

I agree with you . In talking to some attorneys, I emphasized that I could illustrate what the accident report stated. But i was not proficient, for example, in physics and dynamics enough to say at what point a car in a skid going off into a ditch rolled up enough so the forces involved exceeded the center of gravity, flipped the car and crushed the occupants. This is what you go hire a phd for. Some of the resistance i've encountered has been the "cumulative effect" of showing the video; in some cases they will only allow it to show once. In other cases, the judge feels regardless of the accuracy, the hi-tech nature would prejudice the jury. And in all cases, I dont want to sit up there and be shredded over my work. I have a lot of special training and capability as an engineer, but I've been involved in litigation before and it's no fun. Still tho, there must be a way to approach the market. Lawyers are just such a different breed I haven't figured it out yet. The closest I've come is to quit talking about courtrooms, and approach it from their marketing viewpoint, becuase most of these firms spend a lot on marketing materials. Then when the courtroom question is asked, I'm there. Realistically though, I've dropped these guys from my marketing effort because i think there are more profitable groups out there. But I would like to try………… mark c