Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Michael J. Malecek: "I've worked with a lot of different animation
outfits over the course of my career in different kinds of litigation and when I finally came
to work with Demonstratives, it was a breath of fresh air."
James W. Dabney: "When I have needed extremely rapid turnaround
from DI, I have gotten it."
Michael J. Malecek: "Their level of services is so high they're
willing to work day or night and make sure it gets done at the highest quality possible."
Lance E. Rewerts: "I can't speak to every animation house, but
I think it's very safe to say we are the biggest and we are certainly the most technically
inclined."
Narrator: In the legal world the purpose of proving
a point cannot be overstated. Introducing, Demonstratives Inc. A team of doctorate level
scientists, researchers, artists and technicians committed to setting new standards for evidence
in the courtroom.
From reconstructing ground vehicle accidents to illustrating sub molecular environments,
DI is the recognized leader in litigation animation.
Charles Fox: "Well, Demonstratives started as a litigation
services group in Engineering Animation. That's where our experience comes from. And that
group really invented animation for the courtroom. And I think that the expertises we bring to
the table with our scientific backgrounds, combined with the advance nature of the tools,
allow us to communicate with juries better then we ever have in the past."
Daniel Kruger: "We have probably between a 150 and 200 years
of collective experience in 3-D animated graphics."
James W. Dabney: "DI has on staff professionals with advanced
degrees who are able not just to study and create scaled models of physical apparatus.
But they can actually authenticate the evidence and present it in court."
Daniel Kruger: "We have a Mechanical Engineering Ph.D., a
Molecular Biology Ph.D., and then an Aerospace/Engineering Mechanics Ph.D. Our project managers have
the technical expertise to understand the case very quickly."
Charles Fox: "We use to really consider ourselves a tool
for high-stakes litigation. And that you know a lot had to be on the line to be willing
to bring in a team to create the animation and present it and all the infrastructure
that was required to make it happen. I think now a days, we can do it in a much more efficient
way that will allow a lot more legal teams to use high end animation in the court room."
Daniel Kruger: "We would probably have accident reconstruction
type of case, a construction defect and delay case, a biotechnology case of some sort involving
genetics or drug production or implants to the human body. We also have something involving
Computer technology such as an electronics, computer hardware, software, any type of electronic
device or electronic technology that's out there such as GPS or DRAM technologies, silicon
wafer manufacturing, just a broad range of things."
James W. Dabney: "When you engage DI on a project, they will
set up a private password protected site that you can access. When they have a rendering
that they consider is worth your looking at you can just logon a website, see it, and
then give your comments to the professional who is responsible for it."
Lance Rewerts: "They essentially have the ability to look
over our shoulders. As soon as possible is ready to review they can review it. As soon
as we have something done it's posted. Literally we can make changes, have them posted, and
have a conference call 10 minutes later with everybody on the team."
Daniel Kruger: "We have taken apart whole automobiles in
the past. And we have done some work for some of the major automotive manufacturers. Seat
belt retractors, seat belt buckles, engine components, engines from light aircraft, pumps,
computers, modems in the past, computer monitors, keyboards, hard drives of various types. Just
any kind of device that you can take apart we've had to take apart."
James W. Dabney: "I've had more than one experience like that
where DI created animations have been not only been received in evidence, but they have
been so unassailable that the opposing counsel has not even attempted to cross examination
the presenter of the evidence."
Lance Rewerts: "In terms of admissibility, DI has never had
an animation excluded due to our work."
Charles Fox: "One of the attorneys I know in one case that
was kind of fun. She said that she's seen the animation several times as we were preparing
them drafts and getting them ready. So instead of watching the animations when they came
up and the experts started using them, she watched the other side's attorneys. And she
said when the animations started to play their faces just dropped. She said I just love that
feeling it was so cool to see that cause they saw the animation they got it. And they knew
it was going to be trouble."
Michael J. Malecek: "The modern jury and judges need pictures
to understand things. That is only complicated by the fact that dealing with high complexity
technology. I think that lawyers who don't use animation are tying one hand behind their
back when they are trying to teach judges and juries about complicated technology."
James W. Dabney: "I have been in litigations where the other
side uses animation as nothing more than visual argument and they seemingly acquiesce and
the notion that it's not going to come into evidence it's just visual argument. Well that's
all very well and good but, when the jury retires, I want my evidence in the jury room."
Narrator: Accurate. Convincing. Irrefutable. Demonstratives
Inc. has been advancing the science of 3-D animation for litigation from its introduction
into the courtroom to the essential evidentiary tool it is today. When your case calls for
a clear demonstration of fact, call DI. Toll-free at 877-480-4060 or visit us online at www.demonstratives.com.