Expert Witness & Consultation Services
Dr. Valliere has served as an expert witness and consultant nationally and internationally. She has provided expert testimony and consultation for all branches of the military. Dr. Valliere and her colleagues are able to provide expert opinions in the areas of interpersonal violence, sexual assault, intimate partner violence, victim dynamics and behavior, and offender behavior and risk. She has been utilized throughout the trial process by both the prosecution and defense to develop strategy, prepare witnesses, advise on direct and cross-examination, and interview victims for sentencing or offenders for rehabilitation potential.
Dr. Valliere also has expertise to examine a case and provide insight into the issues, challenges, and dynamics involved in the highly complex nature of sexual assault and intimate partner violence for the trial team, whether it involves a criminal or civil case.
Example Cases and Clients
Experience & professionalism produce results
Dr. Valliere has been used in high profile cases with high stakes. Here are some examples of the cases in which she has been retained.
Commonwealth v. William Cosby
Hale v. Maersk (a verdict listed in top 100 of 2010)
Doe v. Deutsche Bank
Doe v. Lyft, Inc.
Commonwealth v. Dengler (opinion upheld by PA Supreme Court)
Cases involving the Boy Scouts, Catholic Church, and other national organizations
Numerous cases involving assaults at massage franchises
Cases involving sexual harassment, sex trafficking, and residential abuse of disabled clients
Our agency provides evaluations of violent offenders, both physical and sexual, that include an assessment of risk, analysis of behavior, diagnostic considerations, and recommendations for treatment and management.
When there is a question involving an individual's psychological and/or cognitive functioning, we provide a comprehensive exploration and analysis through the use of interiew and testing to provide answers, recommendations, and diagnoses.
Personal Injury Evaluations
Our personal injury evaluations include and go beyond diagnoses related to harm and trauma. Because we are highly experienced in understanding the profound impact of abuse and complex nature of trauma, we can assess harm that is not captured by diagnoses alone.
Parenting at Risk Evaluations
When a parent has a history of harming a child or a history that poses challenges to protective parenting, we evaluate the risks, needs of the parent, and prevailing treatment issues, with a focus on ensuring the safety of children and the enhancement of parenting skills.
Serious Mental Injury (SMI) Evaluations
A child can experience significant harm from a care taker, but have no physical injuries. Psychological abuse leaves no marks, but can cause serious psychological damage to children, as can witnessing violence or abuse. SMI evaluations assess the mental injury of abuse to the child victim.
Risk of Harm Evaluations (§ 5329)
Traditional custody evaluations are inappropriate and can be traumatic or dangerous when a parent has been abusive or violent, or there are allegations of abuse. These evaluations allow the focus in a custodial situation to be an assessment of risk for harm in an altered protocol.
Sexually Aggressive Youth Evaluations
Not all sexual behavior is the same, especially in children and adolescents. These evaluations will assess the pathways for the youth's sexual aggression, treatment needs, and assessment of risk factors.
Reunification Readiness Assessments
Reunification readiness is determined by an offender's accountability and willingness to address the victim's issues, the victim's willingess to engage and risk of damage, and the non-offending parent's willingness to address issues to protect the child. These evaluations assess one or more parties prior to the reunification process.
Competency & Certification Evaluations
The Court often has questions about an individual's competency to stand trial, culpability for criminal behavior, and whether a juvenile should be tried as an adult. We are able to help answer the Court's questions through competency and culpability evaluations.