Well I didn’t follow my own advice but your response was like a train wreck. You don’t necessarily want to look but you can't help it.

Some of what you say actually has some merit. Ego's are in abundance here including me and you I see. This job does require an ere of confidence and ego but also requires one to have the ability to admit ones mistake, learn by it and pass that knowledge on to others. Many come here to ask questions before they make a mistake. No one person knows everything about everything so a good investigator will always do some research before he/she makes a final decision on a particular case.

I do see at times folks come on asking for info and then when alternate views are given that may not have fit their original hypothesis they have much trouble accepting that. There are some here that will never admit they are wrong about anything it just isn’t in them. Those are few.

I guess it’s your original approach shot that turned some folks off. I have some experience with that. The other thing is nobody really knows what your area of expertise is if any. Without knowing where it is you are coming from it somewhat looks like you showed up to a gunfight armed only with a dull pencil. There are some really smart people on this board. It appears your knowledge comes from one particular expert. Based on what I have read about your case I think his methodology is flawed on many levels. The court recognized that and acted appropriately. Not much more to say. I too am sorry for your loss.



Good luck.

Dave Higday
CFI/CFEI