Idaho Casework,
Pursuit, Force and Police Practices

No pattern can be drawn from a file as small as Idaho's. It is a mix of police pursuit, use of force and police practices questions, and the records behind them differ: each has to establish something different before the conduct in it can be measured.

A pursuit record has to show sequence: what the officers knew, said and decided at each point, in the order it happened. It comes from the radio traffic, dispatch records and dash camera video captured while vehicles were moving, and from the reports written afterward. The analysis measures that sequence against the agency's pursuit policy and national standards.

A force record has to show what the officer knew when force was used, and how that force was reported and reviewed afterward. It comes from investigation reports, officer and civilian witness statements, deposition transcripts, and the body-worn and dash camera video of the encounter. The analysis reads it on the totality of the facts and circumstances and without hindsight, against the agency's use-of-force policy and the officer's training.

A police practices question is measured against the agency's written policies and procedures, the officers' training and national standards. The report names any departure from agency policy or from generally accepted practice that the record shows, and says where it appears; its bearing on a constitutional claim, a criminal charge or liability is a legal question, because legal conclusions remain counsel's and the expert addresses police practices.

The Idaho file has matters in both court systems, fewer of them in federal court than in the state courts. The stage at which the opinion is needed, and the conduct it addresses, differ between a Section 1983 claim and a state criminal case in Idaho. In the civil case, the opinion addresses the conduct the claim challenges, measured against accepted practice and agency policy, and it runs through a written report, and a deposition if one is taken, before any trial testimony. In the criminal case, it addresses the police work behind the charge, and it can be needed well before trial, in pretrial examination or at a suppression hearing.

Professor Gilbertson's testimony has not been excluded at trial in any state or federal court. Admissibility in any particular matter remains retaining counsel's responsibility. The courts where testimony has been admitted are listed on the Library page on how many matters and where.

Retaining from Idaho runs on the same terms as every engagement. It opens with a conflict check, and counsel hears about a conflict immediately. A first inquiry holds the case type and posture, the jurisdiction and case number, the governing deadlines, what the record contains so far, and the parties for the conflict check. Nothing privileged travels with a first inquiry, and privileged material is never exchanged by email.

After retention the record travels on physical media, a computer flash drive or an external hard drive by mail or courier; online sharing services are not used. Depositions are taken by Zoom or a similar platform, so an Idaho deposition does not wait on a travel calendar. Expert reports require sixty days of advance notice, and a bullet-point outline of the report is approved with retaining counsel before writing begins.

The practice is based in Naples, Florida, and trial testimony is offered in Idaho on the published travel terms. The fee schedule and the travel terms are set out in full on the For Counsel page, and the Library note on what to send with a first inquiry covers the first step item by item.