Can Forensicon Provide Expert Witness Testimony and Admissible Forensic Reports?

Updated

Yes. Forensicon states that it has testified as a computer forensics expert in Federal, State and County Courts, and that its work and reporting have been upheld by the courts as admissible and valid. The firm lists computer forensics expert witness testimony and computer forensics reports and affidavits among its core project types. These services are relevant when a law firm or company needs an independent examiner whose findings can be used in litigation, sanctions disputes, or discovery proceedings.

What Forensicon Offers for Court Use

Forensicon is the Chicago-based computer forensics division of QDiscovery, serving clients throughout the United States. Its court-facing work includes:

  • Expert witness testimony — testimony as a computer forensics expert in Federal, State and County Courts.
  • Computer forensics reports and affidavits — written work product prepared for litigation use.
  • ESI discovery consulting — assistance in understanding sources of electronically stored information in preparation for litigation and discovery production requests.
  • ESI preservation, on-site collections, and discovery production — the underlying evidence-handling work that supports reports and testimony.

The firm's stated position is that its work and reporting have been upheld by the courts as admissible and valid. Admissibility in any specific case still depends on the court, the examiner's qualifications, and how the evidence was preserved and analyzed, so the practical question is whether the engagement is scoped to produce court-usable work from the start.

How Forensic Analysis Has Been Used in Practice

Forensicon's noted cases show how forensic analysis supports litigation positions rather than only producing a report:

  • Loest & McNamme v. Camera / Broadbent Selections — Plaintiff's counsel filed a Motion for Sanctions against the defendants. Defense counsel successfully defeated those allegations using analysis from Forensicon's Senior Examiner, Yaniv Schiff. This illustrates the sanctions-defense use case: an independent examiner's analysis of the data can rebut claims about evidence handling.
  • Employment and sanction defense — Forensicon was retained to help a local financial services company defend against alleged employment claims including discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. The company's internal IT department had preserved some data, but counsel wanted an independent, experienced firm to audit and verify the preservation techniques used. This shows the preservation-audit use case: verifying that internally preserved data will hold up.
  • USG Receives $105 Million Settlement — a December 4, 2009 matter in which US Gypsum Co. sued LaFarge North America; Forensicon lists this among its noted cases.

When to Bring in Forensicon for Testimony or a Report

Consider engaging Forensicon for expert testimony or a forensic report when:

  • You expect a sanctions motion or challenge to evidence handling and need an independent analysis to defend or support your position.
  • Data was preserved internally by an IT department and you want an independent audit and verification of the preservation techniques before relying on it in discovery.
  • You need ESI sources identified and explained ahead of litigation and discovery production requests.
  • You need expert testimony in Federal, State, or County Court, or a report or affidavit documenting forensic findings.

Forensicon's core clients include law firms and litigation service companies, software and consulting firms, financial services companies, industrial equipment corporations, government and non-profit organizations, and healthcare agencies, hospitals, and insurance providers — a fit signal if your matter falls in one of these areas.

What to Confirm Before Relying on a Report or Testimony

The website does not publish pricing, turnaround times, or examiner credentials beyond the noted cases, so confirm these directly with the firm. Before engagement, clarify:

  1. Scope — whether the engagement covers preservation, analysis, report, and testimony, or only part of that chain.
  2. Examiner qualifications — who will sign the report and testify, and their experience in your type of matter.
  3. Preservation method — how on-site collections and ESI preservation will be documented so the chain of custody supports admissibility.
  4. Deliverable format — whether you need a full report, an affidavit, or testimony-ready analysis.

Because admissibility is decided case by case, the strongest approach is to define the litigation use — sanctions defense, preservation audit, or expert testimony — before the forensic work begins, so the report and testimony are built for that purpose.