Special Situations · Investigations
When the normal process stops producing clarity.
Independent technical investigation for executives and counsel when an incident, dispute, failure, or unusual claim has become material.
01 · The Situations
Problems that fit no service catalog.
An incident conclusion that needs independent review before the board accepts it.
Two credible teams with technically conflicting explanations for the same failure.
A vendor dispute where the technical facts decide the commercial outcome.
A failed implementation, and disagreement about why.
Evidence that needs to be reconstructed before anyone can say what happened.
A technical question arising in litigation that needs an answer that will hold up.
A disputed remediation plan, and a large invoice that depends on it.
A consequential technical claim nobody has independently tested.
02 · The Stance
What the evidence supports, and where it stops.
I do not advocate for a predetermined technical conclusion. I determine what the available evidence supports and where the evidence stops. Fact is separated from inference, assumptions from evidence, and material unknowns from noise.
The background for this work is high-severity incident response and investigation: technically ambiguous environments, contested explanations, and conclusions that had to hold up in front of executives. That is the discipline these situations get.
The output is a defensible conclusion. Where the evidence is not sufficient to support one, that finding is the conclusion, along with what it would take to know.