If one tool in PSI’s toolbox could be described as foundational, it would be the 3D Working Model. This concept underlies all the work we perform and is the most powerful expression of our mission to illuminate the truth in each one of our cases. PSI adheres to a 3-part process in our engineering casework – Document, Analyze and Visualize. The 3D working Model is central to each phase of our work.
Our more experienced and longer term clients have come to rely on the power of PSI’s 3D Working Model to provide a single, highly accurate model that contains all the critical pieces of the reconstruction. These clients often start with the creation of the 3D Working Model, and then use it to ensure the expert testimony maintains fidelity to case facts, to critique and analyze the opposition’s theories and ultimately, after the model is proven accurate, to create compelling 3D animations and video of the results.
The 3D Working Model contains every piece of documented evidence, in-house analysis, expert measurements, expert analysis, opposition data and physical object, accurately positioned within an exact replica of the crime or accident scene as generated via 3D laser Scanning. The result is a virtual model that is used as a test-bed to hone opinions, test theories and rule out version of events that do not comport with the physical evidence.
- Reconstruction – How fast must plaintiff have been traveling in order to reach the POI?
- Ballistic Analysis – Recreating the position of spent cartridges and projectile strikes can help answer “Where was the Shooter when they pulled the trigger” or “What position was the victim in when the shooter decided to fire”?
- Alternate Scenarios – What happens if the speed of one of the driver’s increases or decreases by 5mph?
- Line of Sight Analysis – What was available to be seen by the plaintiff or defendant in the seconds leading up to impact?
- Eye-Witness Testimony – Could the witness have really seen what they claim from their vantage point?
- Physical Evidence – How well does your analysis match the physical evidence at the scene? How well does the opposition’s analysis match the physical evidence?
- Hydrology – Can water flows reach the affected area given a specific source and the grade of the roadway?
- Engineering Analysis – Can object A fit inside B? Can part A of an object reach plaintiff in position B? Can vehicle A make the skid marks left at the scene and attributed to vehicle A?