The forensics market is uneven. Some providers are outstanding. Others produce reports that read well and fall apart at the first serious cross examination. The distinction is rarely visible from the website.
Questions worth asking
- Which of your examiners will actually do the work, and what is their court experience?
- What accreditation does the laboratory hold, and to what scope?
- How do you handle chain of custody and hash verification, in practice?
- Can I speak to a solicitor who has instructed you on a comparable matter?
- What is your position when the evidence does not support the instructing party's case?
What good looks like
Direct answers. Named examiners. Willingness to say what the evidence cannot support, as well as what it can. A written scope and a fixed range before work begins. Any provider that will not do those things is not the provider you want on the witness list.