Objectivity Principle Affirmed in Engineer A Forensic Role
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/172#Objectivity_Principle_Affirmed_in_Engineer_A_Forensic_Role
Properties
Instance of
Applied to
Engineer A's initial forensic analysis report prepared for plaintiff's attorney
Balancing with
Confidentiality Principle
Loyalty
Concrete expression
The Board affirmed that Engineer A's initial conduct — producing an analysis report inconsistent with the plaintiff's legal interests because that was his honest technical conclusion — exemplified proper forensic objectivity, and that engineers must 'call them as they see them' rather than act as hired guns
Confidence
0.96
Importance
high
Interpretation
The Board used Engineer A's initial objectivity as a positive exemplar to underscore the principle that forensic engineers owe objectivity to the technical truth, not to the retaining party's litigation interests — his error was not in his initial objectivity but in his subsequent switching sides
Invoked by
Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides
Tension resolution
Objectivity is affirmed as the governing standard for forensic engineers; the fact that Engineer A's honest analysis was adverse to his retaining client was praised, not criticized
Source Evidence
Source text
We make this point to underscore the importance of forensic engineers 'calling them as they see them.'
Text references
Engineer A developed an analysis report that was inconsistent with the legal interests of the client. Under the facts, Engineer A did not act in the role as a 'hired gun,' seeking to testify in favor of the client who was paying his fee.
We make this point to underscore the importance of forensic engineers 'calling them as they see them.'
it has sometimes been suggested that engineers who act as paid expert witnesses have an inherent conflict between their duty to tell the truth and their obligation to perform their services consistent with the best interests of the client.
TTL
@prefix case172: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/172#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case172:Objectivity_Principle_Affirmed_in_Engineer_A_Forensic_Role a proeth:Objectivity,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Objectivity Principle Affirmed in Engineer A Forensic Role" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's initial forensic analysis report prepared for plaintiff's attorney" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Confidentiality Principle",
"Loyalty" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The Board affirmed that Engineer A's initial conduct — producing an analysis report inconsistent with the plaintiff's legal interests because that was his honest technical conclusion — exemplified proper forensic objectivity, and that engineers must 'call them as they see them' rather than act as hired guns" ;
proeth:confidence "0.96" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "172" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "172" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The Board used Engineer A's initial objectivity as a positive exemplar to underscore the principle that forensic engineers owe objectivity to the technical truth, not to the retaining party's litigation interests — his error was not in his initial objectivity but in his subsequent switching sides" ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Forensic Expert Switching Sides" ;
proeth:principleclass "Objectivity" ;
proeth:sourcetext "We make this point to underscore the importance of forensic engineers 'calling them as they see them.'" ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Objectivity is affirmed as the governing standard for forensic engineers; the fact that Engineer A's honest analysis was adverse to his retaining client was praised, not criticized" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A developed an analysis report that was inconsistent with the legal interests of the client. Under the facts, Engineer A did not act in the role as a 'hired gun,' seeking to testify in favor of the client who was paying his fee.",
"We make this point to underscore the importance of forensic engineers 'calling them as they see them.'",
"it has sometimes been suggested that engineers who act as paid expert witnesses have an inherent conflict between their duty to tell the truth and their obligation to perform their services consistent with the best interests of the client." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 172 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:28:40.770666"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 172 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
172
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00
First case
172
Generated
2026-03-01T18:17:07.586626+00:00
Attributed to
Case 172 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:28:40.770666
Generated by
ProEthica Case 172 Extraction