Holyk

Death Investigation
Case# 140162977

ForensicVideoAnalysis

OfficerPaulTaylor392
SpokanePoliceDepartment
MajorCrimes(CollisionReconstruction)

PreparedbyGrantFredericks,Analyst,
ForensicVideoSolutions,Inc.
July20,2014

Forensic Video Solutions, 105 West Rolland Ave., Spokane, WA 99218

509 467-3559
www.forensicvideosolutions.com
Confidential

Page 1

7/20/2014

Table of Contents

Introduction

Summary.

Qualifications.

Compensation..

11

PrimaryEquipment&SoftwareUsed.

11

NoticetoReader.

11

Exhibits...

12

Methodology..

15

Analysis...

21

Opinion..

29

Confidential

Page 2

7/20/2014

Introduction
On June 10, 2014, I was retained as an expert in Forensic Video Analysis on behalf of the
Spokane Police Department in its investigation of the death of Ryan Holyk.

In various communications and meetings, I have been asked to conduct an analysis of

video images in order to provide an opinion on the following questions:

1. By examining video images recorded to the Gus Johnson Ford Dealer, located in
the 8300 block of East Sprague Ave, in Spokane, WA, can I determine the
following:
the speed of a police vehicle driven by Deputy Bowmann
the speed of Ryan Holyk while riding his bike
the point of contact between the police vehicle and Holyk

After an initial examination of the video images and of the Digital Video Recording
System, it was apparent that the time-stamp depicted on the video images was not
accurate, therefore it is not possible to provide a speed of movement from image to
image. In order to provide an estimated speed of movement, several consecutive images
must be averaged together.

In addition, the initial video analysis did not locate any images that support that the police
vehicle made physical contact with Holyk. In fact, the initial examination shows that
there is visual evidence that the police vehicle did not come into contact with Holyk.

2. As a result of the initial observations, I was asked to provide an explanation of the

following:
Confidential

Page 3

7/20/2014

Explain in detail why the video images do not reliably depict the passage
of time
If possible, can you provide a range of possible speeds and opine on the
most likely speeds of movement, if it is save to do so
Describe, as precisely as possible, the movement of the police vehicle and
Holyk, and if there is no contact between the two, determine the closest
distance that the police vehicle was to Holyk during the incident
By considering the speeds of the police vehicle, the Mazda and Holyk,
attempt to determine the outcome if Holyk had not fallen to the ground,
but all speeds remained constant

Confidential

Page 4

7/20/2014

Summary
The police vehicle was likely traveling at approximately 74 mph.

Holyk lost control of his bicycle as he entered the roadway; at that time, the police
vehicle was 163 to the east.
Holyks forward progression ended and he was on the ground when the police
vehicle was approximately 44 to the east of Holyks position.

The police vehicle drove around Holyks body to the north.

There was no contact between the police vehicle and Holyk or the police vehicle
and Holyks bicycle.

The Digital Video Recording (DVR) system at Gus Johnson Ford displays an on-screen
time-stamp that is not accurate, and therefore exact speeds of the police vehicle or of the
Holyk bicycle cannot be determined precisely. Rather than displaying an accurate time
when each image was recorded, the DVR time-stamp merely displays an average delay
between images, artificially advancing the display clock by 167ms per image, which is
the same as six images per second.

Over time, the average 167ms refresh rate is

relatively accurate. However, when examining short segments of test recordings, it was
observed that the actual timing between images ranges from 67ms to 267ms.

As a result of this analysis, the police vehicles speed can only be estimated to be within a
range from 67 mph to 81 mph.

The police vehicles movements however, can be

determined by measuring distance traveled over a period of ten images in Camera 3NW,
and then averaged.
Confidential

Page 5

7/20/2014

A timing test of the DVR, using a series of twenty-two ten-image segments, netted an
average refresh rate of 167ms.

By applying the test results to the incident video, it is likely that the police vehicle was
traveling at approximately 74 mph.

Using the same methodology, Holyk is estimated to have been traveling at approximately
12 mph.

A careful examination of the positions of the police vehicle and the positions of Holyk
was conducted using Reverse Projection of the video images over calibrated scan data of
millions of 3D laser measurements of the scene.

The Reverse Projection provides

measured positions of the police vehicle, a witness vehicle, and of Holyk, as they move
toward the intersection. The examination shows that immediately upon entering the
intersection, Holyk begins to lose control of his bicycle, and starts to go downward
toward the ground.

Holyks forward progression stopped when the police vehicle was at approximately 44
feet east of Holyk.

The video shows that the police vehicle drove past Holyk on the north side, missing him
and his bike by approximately 2.3 feet.

Confidential

Page 6

7/20/2014

Qualifications
I am a Forensic Video Analyst with extensive experience in the recovery, scientific
examination, and evaluation of recorded video and audio information involving criminal
and civil investigations in the United States (US), Canada, the United Kingdom (UK),
and elsewhere. I have been continuously active in this science since 1984.

I attained an undergraduate degree in Television Broadcast Communications, with an

emphasis on television engineering in 1982.

As a Forensic Video Analyst, I have processed thousands of videotapes and computer

discs containing digital multimedia evidence for both criminal and civil cases. I have
been providing expert testimony as a Forensic Video Analyst since the early 1990s. In
the past ten (10) years I have provided expert testimony in the field of Forensic Video
Analysis more than one hundred (100) times in US and Canadian courts at all levels. I
have testified as an expert in Forensic Video Analysis in Washington State, Oregon,
Idaho, California, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, Iowa, Missouri, Massachusetts,
Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maine, New York, Texas, Florida, British Columbia, Alberta,
Manitoba, in the Yukon Territories, London, England, Auckland, New Zealand, and in
the Cayman Islands.

From 1999 until December of 2012, I was the Principal Instructor for a series of Forensic
Video Analysis courses offered by the Law Enforcement & Emergency Services Video
Association (LEVA), a non-profit organization that has trained more than 2000 law
enforcement video analysts from throughout the world.

Confidential

Page 7

7/20/2014

From 2006 until December of 2012, I was the Team Leader for LEVAs Forensic Video
Analysis Certification Program.

For the last fourteen (14 years), I have been the Team Leader of LEVAs Curriculum
Development Committee, and I continue in that capacity.

For the last ten (10) years, I have been a contract instructor of Forensic Video Analysis
and Digital Multimedia Evidence Processing for the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) National Academy in Quantico, VA.

I am the Digital Video Advisor to the International Association of Chiefs of Police

(IACP) for its In-Car Video project and for its Digital Interview Room Standards project,
which are funded by the US Department of Justice (DOJ). These programs are focused
specifically on the development of compression standards for improved performance of
digital video systems to ensure accurate presentation in court.

I am currently an adjunct instructor of Forensic Video Analysis for the University of

Indianapolis, IN. I have provided more than 2800 hours of classroom instruction to video
analysts from throughout the world who have attended the universitys Digital
Multimedia Evidence Processing Lab. Students serve as video analysts, primarily from
law enforcement agencies in the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, and Asia. Each of the
courses focuses on digital video and analog video engineering principles, and on the
application of proper scientific methodologies for processing digital multimedia
evidence, including scientific techniques used to determine image timing intervals in
order to accurately convert time-lapsed video into real-time video for synchronization of
separately recorded video sources.

Confidential

Page 8

7/20/2014

One of the courses that I teach at the University of Indianapolis is entitled

Photographic/Video Comparisons, which focuses on the identification of vehicles,
clothing, and weapons captured to digital and analog video recording sources. Vehicle
identification examines class and unique characteristics of Questioned Vehicle, and often
included headlight spread pattern analysis. I have taught this course in Canada at the
British Columbia Institute of Technology, in the UK, and in Indianapolis for each of the
last twelve (12) years. This course is accredited by the University of Indianapolis and by
LEVA, which recognizes the course in its Forensic Video Analysis Certification
Program.

A significant element of the Photographic/Video Comparison course material, and of the

other courses that I teach, involves the science of Reverse Projection and 3D analysis.
Reverse Projection is the scientific process of obtaining accurate measurements and
making accurate observations from photographic and video images. Reverse Projection
has been used among imaging scientists, investigators, and in US courts regularly for
more than forty (40) years as a tool to reproduce crime and accident scenes, in order to
conduct measurements and to make other accurate observations.

Each of the courses that I teach focuses on reflection of light, pixel tracking, digital
compression technology, color measurement/analysis, speed estimation, and on digital
and analog artifact (error) identification for the sole purpose of ensuring accurate
interpretation of video evidence. Since each of the signal and digital components could
impact the meaning of images, the majority of testimony that I have provided includes a
narrative explanation of the events captured to the video recording system.

Confidential

Page 9

7/20/2014

I am a former Police Officer with the City of Vancouver Police Department in Canada
where I was assigned to the Criminal Investigation Division as the head of the
departments Forensic Video Unit.

Confidential

Page 10

7/20/2014

Compensation
See attached Fee Schedule

Primary Equipment & Software Used

Avid Media Composer 8.0
Photoshop CC
Faro 3D Scanner
SceneVision 3D
QuickTime Pro 7.7.2

Notice to Reader
This report includes embedded video and embedded PDF documents. The embedded
video and PDF documents are identified with the following icons:

When they appear in the report, click on the icons to play the video or to display the PDF.

When displaying the pdf, the reader can hold down the Ctrl key on the keyboard and
strike the L key in order to force the pdf to Full Screen. The reader can then advance
through the pdf document using the right and left arrow keys on the keyboard. The
reader can exit from the pdf by using the Esc key and can then X out of the pdf and
return to the report.

Confidential

Page 11

7/20/2014

Exhibits
All information, any and all of the underlying foundational or support materials, and/or
any portion thereof within this document, or any of its references or attachments, are to
be considered important exhibits with regard to this case and this report.

All, .exe files, .mov files, .wmv files, .asf files, jpg files, .txt files, .czd files, PDF files,
images, videos, recordings, testing, methods, procedures, etc. are all to be considered
exhibits that are hereby fully incorporated, and are an integral part of this report, and may
be used at any time during any aspect of proceedings associated with this case, including,
but not limited to, deposition and/or trial as exhibits to aid in my testimony or
presentation.

In order to attempt to answer the posed questions, I was provided with the following
exhibits for my analysis:

Item 1.

Three dispatch audio recordings

Item 2.

Cam 3 NW 3.exe

Item 3.

Cam 3 NW day.exe

Item 4.

Cam 3 NW.exe

Item 5.

Forddaytime cam.exe

Item 6.

FordNighttime CAM 3 W.exe

Item 7.

Combined PIP v5.wmv

Item 8.

5-23-14 Hico Argonne and Sprague vedio.asf

Item 9.

Charlie P'scam14 1023to1030.asf

Item 10. Charlie P'scam15 1023to1030 (1).asf

Confidential

Page 12

7/20/2014

Item 11. Carpenter 05-23-14 Containing fifty hospital photographs of Ryan

Holyk
Item 12. Carr 05-23-14 Containing one hundred and forty-three scene
photographs
Item 13. Moman 05-23-14 Containing twenty-nine photographs of the scene
Item 14. Taylor 05-23-14 Containing sixty photographs of the scene
Item 15. Taylor 06-07-14 Containing fifty-three photographs of the witnesses
Mazda B2300 pick up truck
Item 16. Veh - SVPD 763 & Bicycle 06-10-14 MD Containing three hundred and
forty-two images of the police vehicle and of the bicycle
Item 17. Deputy Bodman Crash Sprague and Vista.czd

Each of these items was reviewed in detail.

During the examination of the video in this case, careful consideration was given to
technical variables that can introduce errors into the image, and that could result in the
misinterpretation of the images by an untrained observer of compressed video images.
Some of the variables that require accurate interpretation include:

Brightness values affected by clipping and oversaturation

Artificial edge patterns that may affect the shape of objects
Temporal shift in object positioning due to prediction
Object location and shape adjusted by lens distortion
Aspect ratio issues relating to digital sampling
Pixel values affected by clipping and oversaturation
Artificial edge patterns that may affect the shape of objects
GOP structure of images sequences
Confidential

Page 13

7/20/2014

Reference frame identification for frame averaging

Pixel tracking
Difference Filter processes for pixel tracking and object movement
Object location and shape adjusted by lens distortion
X, Y, & Z coordinate identification to assess location, shape and size of
objects

Confidential

Page 14

7/20/2014

Methodology
In order to attempt to answer the questions posed by the investigators in this case, it was
necessary to thoroughly examine the video data recorded to the Gus Johnson Ford DVR.

The examination of the video data from the DVR provides a record of timing intervals
between recorded images. The timing intervals are intended to establish the length of
time (in milliseconds) between images. See Timing Interval Analysis below.

It is also necessary to determine the position of the police vehicle, the witness vehicle,
and the bicycle on the roadway.

Once the positions of the vehicles and bicycle are determined, measurements can be
taken to define distances. The timing interval information, and the vehicle location data,
are examined in detail in this report.

The primary methodologies employed in this analysis include:

Reverse Projection Examination

3D Scan Methodology
Timing Interval Analysis

Confidential

Page 15

7/20/2014

Reverse Projection

Reverse Projection is defined as the scientific process of obtaining accurate

measurements from photographic or video images.

Reverse Projection applies the Scientific Methodology for Identification, which uses the
acronym ACE-VR. The elements of the acronym represent each of the stages employed
to interpret digital compression, and then to accurately overlay historic camera views
with calibrated image geometry of the scene, in order to calibrate the position of objects,
such as vehicles, that are depicted in the historic video images. The elements of ACEVR are: Analyze, Compare, Evaluate, Verify and Report.

In order to conduct an accurate and reliable Reverse Projection analysis, access to the
historic cameras location, in order to replicate its field of view, is helpful. Access to the
original camera, and to the original recording system, reduces the potential for error in
vehicle and object placement.

The vehicle position is confirmed when the historic

perspective is accurately aligned with the image geometry of the 3D scan data.

The position of the target vehicle is determined first by establishing the correct
calibration of the original source. Determining the correct aspect ratio (height to width)
of the image is important, since it is common for surveillance systems, based on digital
technology, to alter the aspect ratio during the digital sampling process.

The Gus

Johnson camera system and DVR creates distortion and applies compression that
combine to negatively effect the aspect ratio of the actual scene.

In order to accurately calibrate the images, 3D scan analysis was conducted, producing
accurate image geometry of the scene. See 3D Scan Methodology below.
Confidential

Page 16

7/20/2014

3D Scan Methodology

3D Scanning produces accurate measurement data using millions of laser measured

points from multiple locations within a scene. Its purpose is to produce an accurate 3D
model of the scanned scene, from which accurate measurements can be obtained, and a
visual model can be created.

The model can then be used to validate the Reverse Projection observations, and to move
the perspective of the viewer away from the historic cameras perspectives, in order to
examine the events from different locations, to conduct accurate measurements and to
produce demonstratives for trial.

A Faro Focus 3D Scanner is used at multiple scan locations within the scene. At each
location, the scanner uses a laser to produce an average of thirty-two million (32,000,000)
samples of the specific target area. Each sample produces data representing the X, Y, Z
positions, and reflective intensity of all sampled points within the scene. The combined
samples produce an accurate three dimensional image of all objects within the
scene/model. The data is used to fly through the model, in order to produce an accurate
image of the scene from any perspective.

During this examination, fifty-seven scan samples were collected and integrated into the
reproduction of the scene. This analysis used data from approximately 1.8 billion scan
samples.

Confidential

Page 17

7/20/2014

Each scan can sample objects hundreds of feet from the scanner. For the purpose of this
analysis, the effective range of each scan is limited to approximately eighty-feet.
Multiple scans are linked together through a calibration process, allowing measurements
to be obtained throughout all models.

The data is then processed using SceneVision 3D software, and converted into aligned
point cloud models. All measurements within the point cloud models are accurate to
within 1/10th of an inch.

At the scene, and prior to the production of the scan models, validation measurements are
taken from within the scanned scene using a Laica Disto Lite handheld point to point
laser. The validation measurements are collected so that they represent inter-scan and
intra-scan areas of the SceneVision 3D models. The validation measurements are then
used to confirm the accuracy of the completed models.

In addition, investigators provided Total Station scan data that was collected at the time
of the incident. The Total Station data was applied to the completed 3D models. Each of
the data points from the Total Station analysis accurately aligned to the 3D scan models.

Confidential

Page 18

7/20/2014

Timing Interval Analysis

Timing intervals represent the length of elapsed time between image captures of the
DVR. By knowing the timing intervals, one can determine the length of time it took for a
vehicle to move from one known position to another known position.

The process of identifying the timing intervals involves the analysis of the recording
process of the DVR, an evaluation of the accuracy of the displayed time stamp, and an
examination of the movement of objects from image to image.

The elapsed time between images is usually articulated in milliseconds (ms). Some
DVRs sample images in linear order from camera to camera, often referred to as
multiplexed. Some DVRs sample multiple images from one camera, before moving to
another camera for sampling. The result is that the dwell-time delays the refresh from
one camera to another. This process is more common in analog recording systems.

With the DVR in this case, the displayed time stamp is inaccurate. Although it purports
to accurately represent images separated by 167ms, the on-screen time stamp actually
represents an average sampling of the internal clock. The DVR produces six images per
second from the targeted cameras. Six images per seconds produces an average refresh
rate of 167ms between images.

On July 11, 2014, in order to validate the image refresh rate of the camera, a calibrated
timing device was introduced to Camera 3 NW signal path. The video was recorded to
the DVR in the same manner as it was recorded at the time of the incident. The video
was recovered, which showed the DVR time stamp overlay and the image of the
Confidential

Page 19

7/20/2014

calibration timing device. This timing test shows that although the DVR purports a
refresh rate of 167ms between images, the actual refresh rate was variable, ranging from
67ms to 267ms.

A careful examination of the variable image refresh rate shows that the average image
refresh rate over a period of time is 167ms. However, small or short groups of images
will vary in their timing.

As a result of this analysis, caution must be applied when attempting to utilize the video
images to opine on the exact speed of the police vehicle.

The attached Image Refresh Rate Demonstration.pdf shows a calibrated time stamp (in
black with blue characters) over the images from the test recording of Camera 3 W on
July 11, 2014.

As described earlier, the DVR time stamp progresses at 167ms

(0.1666667 seconds) intervals. However, the calibrated time stamp shows that the actual
record rate is variable. The millisecond clock at the bottom of the images shows the
actual (calibrated) timing between images.

Confidential

Page 20

7/20/2014

Analysis
The images in this case are captured to two cameras recorded to the Gus Johnson Dealership in the 8300
Block of East Sprague Ave, in Spokane. The DVR is an IPS-1000ELM, twenty-four channel video recorder
manufactured by Exacq Technologies. The camera is an AreCont 20185DN omni-directional camera.

The camera is located on the northwest corner of

the Dealership building complex.

Four cameras are located inside the dome

housing.

Camera 3NW and Camera 3W are located on the west side of

the internal dome housing. Images from the two cameras on
the east side of the housing were not provided for this
examination.

Camera 3 W

Camera 3 NW
Camera 3 NW has a field of view that looks
north onto Sprague Avenue. This camera shows
the westbound movement of the police vehicle
and the witness Mazda. This camera was used
to estimate the approximate speed of the police
vehicle.

Confidential

Page 21

7/20/2014

Camera 3 W looks west toward the intersection

of Sprague Ave and Vista Road, where Holyk
fell to the ground.

Magnified view of location where Holyk fell.

The first images of Holyk are recorded to Cam 3
NW at 10:23:48.277.

Holyk is located some

distance north of East Sprague Ave on North

Vista road.

Holyk
For the purpose of this report, the time-stamp has been magnified for
ease of viewing.

Confidential

Page 22

7/20/2014

The first images of Holyk on Camera 3 W were

recorded at 10:23:51.642.

The top of Holyks head is visible as he rides his

bicycle south, on the east sidewalk of N. Vista
Road, approaching East Sprague Ave.

The attached Line of Sight from Camera to Holyk.pdf shows the position of Holyk and the view from the
camera, as Holyk rides his bicycle south toward East Sprague. As noted in the Scan Methodology section,
earlier in this report, the position of Holyk is determined by overlaying the video images over the geometric
scan of the scene.

Camera 3 W was used to determine the approximate speed of Holyks movements.

Confidential

Page 23

7/20/2014

The video image at 10:23:51.642 from Cam 3 W, which shows the top of Holyks head, provides a calibrated
position when overlaid with the 3D geometry. The scan image below shows the approximate field of view
available to Holyk, if he had looked toward the east on East Sprague Ave.

Camera position

If Holyk were looking

forward

toward

intersection

the
at

10:23:51.642,

the

image to the left shows

the perspective Holyk
may have had of the
intersection
traffic lights.

Confidential

Page 24

7/20/2014

and

the

The AreCont 20185DN omni-directional camera system provides a panorama view of the roadway in front of
the dealership when the two images are attached and synchronized together. Note that Camera 3NW is
sampled first (10:23:48.111), followed by Camera W (10:23:48.153). Camera 3W is sampled approximately
42ms after Camera NW. 42ms is about 1/24th of a second.

The panorama view provides additional information, allowing the viewer to see the approach of the two
vehicles, as Holyk enters the intersection.

Because the camera views are not perfectly synchronized, the vehicles in Cam 3 NW will be depicted in
positions that are slightly different than they actually were when the Cam 3 W image was captured. Since the
police vehicle was traveling at approximately 74 mph, it will be depicted in Cam 3 NW in a position that is
roughly 4.5 feet east of where it would be 42ms later in Camera 3 W.

The attached Panorama 1.pdf shows the synchronized views from 10:23:48.111 to 10:23:53.480. The series
of images shows that when the police vehicle enters the field of view of Camera 3 NW, Holyk is still on the
east sidewalk of N. Vista Street. At this time, the police vehicle and Holyk are approximately 295 apart.

Confidential

Page 25

7/20/2014

The attached Panorama 2.pdf shows the synchronized views from 10:23:53.605 to 10:23:53.981. The series
of images shows Holyk, the police vehicle, and the Mazda approaching the intersection. Holyk arrives at the
edge of the crosswalk at 10:23:53.981, when the police vehicle is 238 to the east.

The attached Panorama 3.pdf shows the synchronized views from 10:23:54.107 to 10:23:54.648. The series
of images shows Holyk, the police vehicle, and the Mazda continuing to approach the intersection. Holyk
enters the roadway at 10:23:54.648, when the police vehicle is 168 to the east.

A careful examination of the video images between 10:23:54.773 and 10:23:55.646, shows that Holyks
movement across the roadway becomes progressively lower in the images, starting immediately as he enters
the road. This is the moment when it appears that Holyk begins to lose control of his bicycle. The attached
Panorama 4.pdf shows Holyks movement downward.

At 10:23:55.646, Holyks forward progression on the roadway stops. The headlights of the police vehicle
reflect off of Holyk, who is on the ground.

Confidential

Page 26

7/20/2014

The police vehicle is

44 east from Holyk
when Holyks forward
progression stops.

Holyks position on the

roadway

does

not

appear to change as the

police vehicle drives
around him.

The attached Panorama 5.pdf shows the synchronized views from 10:23:55.780 to 10:24:08.304. The series
of images shows that Holyks position on the road does not change between the time that the police vehicle is
44 east, through the time that the police vehicle passes Holyks position. The images show Martinez moving
to Holyks position a few moments after the police vehicle moves through the intersection.

The

police

vehicle

passes to the north of

the bicycle by just over
2 feet.

Confidential

Page 27

7/20/2014

In order to assist with the continuity of observations, the attached Combined Panorama.pdf
includes all of the observations noted above in one document.

The attached Position of Bike.pdf shows the relative position of the bicycle, and the position of
the police vehicle, compared to the photograph 14051646_140523222821_0011.JPG from the
Moman photographs.
Because of the original digital compression in the images, it is difficult, without further image processing, to
fully appreciate the movement of Holyk as he approaches, and then enters the roadway. It is also difficult to
observe the lack of movement by Holyk after he goes to the ground, and then to compare his location to his
position after the police vehicle passes him. The attached Difference Filter.pdf subtracts pixel values from
each image depicting Holyks movements from a standard (averaged) image. The result is that objects that
are different from the standard image (Holyk, Martinez and the vehicles) become much more visible.

The Difference Filter.pdf shows that Holyk remains in the same position before and after the police vehicle
passes by him on the ground. No movement of Holyk is detected.

The attached 3D Master Demonstrative.mov is a video clip that combines the video images and the 3D scan
geometry. The video clip shows the position of Holyk at 10:23:51.642, prior to the police vehicle being
recorded to the DVR. The clip plays through the synchronized and calibrated positions of Holyk, the Mazda,
and the police vehicle, as articulated in this report.

The attached What if Holyk Didnt Fall.mov projects Holyks movement and speed across the roadway,
rather than having him fall and stop. The video clip does not alter the police vehicles movement and speed,
and it maintains the speed of the Mazda. The police vehicle misses Holyk by several feet. However, in the
scenario, if no evasive actions are taken, Holyk is struck by the Mazda.

Confidential

Page 28

7/20/2014

Opinion

As outlined in the Timing Interval Analysis section of this report, the DVR does not provide an accurate timestamp. A calibration test shows that the refresh intervals are variable, ranging from 67ms to 267ms. However,
over a number of images, the average refresh rate is 167ms. As a result of this examination, I have formed the
opinion that the police vehicle was traveling between 67 mph and 81 mph. However, by applying the average
refresh rate of the images, it is most likely that the police vehicle was traveling approximately 74 mph.

Applying the same timing analysis as above to Holyks speed, I have formed the opinion that Holyks average
speed was approximately 12 mph.

As a result of carefully examining the movements of the police vehicle and of Holyk, I have observed that
Holyk was stationary on the ground prior to the police vehicle arriving near Holyks location. Holyks position
did not change after the police vehicle passed by. In addition, the Reverse Projection places the police vehicle
to the north of Holyk. As a result of these observations and measurements, I have formed the opinion that the
police vehicle did not come into contact with Holyk.

This report is true and accurate to a reasonable, or higher, degree of professional certainty and/or probability.

Grant Fredericks

Confidential

Page 29

7/20/2014