Brave Investigations

10/07/2026

Attorneys: which phone record would you reach for first to show distracted driving? Voice call, text metadata, device activity, or a combined timeline. Each can be right in the right case. Vote here:

When a crash may involve a phone, everyone wants one record that settles it. In practice, each type of record answers a different question. Which do you consider the best evidence of distracted driving?

09/23/2026

A monthly statement showing "4:38 PM, 4 min" cannot tell you whether a call was still connected at impact. The corresponding call detail record often can, down to the second.
New on the blog: what actually separates billing records from CDRs, why tower fields are not GPS, why a data session is not proof of screen use, and eight practical tips for Texas personal injury and trucking counsel.

A Texas personal injury attorney calls and says the phone records are already in hand. The opposition answered the request for production, the production arrived as a PDF, and the theory is that the defendant driver was on the phone when the collision occurred. Then the file comes over, and what is....

09/16/2026

Billing records and call detail records are not the same document, and in a Texas crash case the gap between them can be the whole case. Rounded minutes versus second-level timing. Tower fields or none. Complete message detail or a monthly total.
Four differences, and each one controls depending on the facts. Which matters most in your practice? Vote here:

Attorneys tell me all the time that they already have the phone records. Then the file arrives and it is a billing statement, not a call detail record. In a crash case, that difference decides whether you have an opinion or a guess. This week's poll: what's the difference between billing records and...

09/09/2026

If you are handling a crash case involving alleged mobile phone distraction, understanding the limits of carrier records is critical. A Call Detail Record can prove network transmission times and routing events, but it cannot look through the glass screen to confirm active driver interaction.
Our new article covers what carrier CDRs prove, why switch disposition codes matter for incoming calls, how cell tower coverage sectors actually work, and when a forensic device extraction is necessary. Read our practical guide for litigation counsel here:

Understand what Call Detail Records (CDRs) prove in motor vehicle crash litigation, including transmission metadata, data logs, and forensic limits.

09/02/2026

When a commercial vehicle or auto crash occurs, carrier Call Detail Records (CDRs) are often the first digital evidence subpoenaed.
However, raw carrier records can be misleading without proper technical context. What do you believe Call Detail Records can actually prove on their own in a disputed liability case?
Vote below, and check back next week for our breakdown of how to interpret these records for litigation.

When a commercial vehicle or auto crash occurs, carrier Call Detail Records (CDRs) are often the first digital evidence subpoenaed. However, raw carrier records can be misleading without proper technical context. What do you believe Call Detail Records can actually prove on their own in a disputed l...

08/26/2026

New on the Brave Investigations blog:
Realistic Expectations for Cell Phone Device Forensics in Civil and Criminal Cases
Device forensics can be powerful in commercial vehicle crash cases, other civil litigation, and criminal defense. It can also be oversold.
This post covers what attorneys should actually expect when:
• deleted texts/app data may still be recoverable
• you get a solid usage timeline but not full content
• locks and encryption only allow a partial extraction
• a wipe or overwrite leaves little or nothing behind
Also discussed: why forensic access keeps changing as manufacturers improve security and tools try to keep pace.
Read it here:

https://braveinvestigations.com/realistic-expectations-cell-phone-device-forensics-civil-criminal/

08/19/2026

Quick question for attorneys and legal professionals:
What is a realistic expectation from a cell phone device forensic exam in litigation?
• Recovered deleted texts/app data
• Usage timeline without full content
• Partial extraction (locks/encryption)
• Little/no data after wipe or overwrite
All of these can be right depending on the phone, encryption, how fast it was preserved, and whether it was wiped or kept in use. Phone security is also constantly changing, so results are not static from case to case.
Cast your vote here:

Cell phone device forensics is one of the most over-promised areas in litigation. Attorneys in commercial vehicle crashes, other civil cases, and criminal defense are often told the phone will “show everything.” Sometimes it does. Often it doesn’t. I put together a short poll for legal profess...

08/12/2026

Did a driver actually use a phone at the time of a crash? Did a device record prove intentional use during an alleged offense?
Those questions cannot always be answered by a single call, text, or data record.
Our latest article explains how attorneys can evaluate CDRs, data session records, device forensic artifacts, and the broader timeline of evidence. It is designed for personal injury attorneys, commercial vehicle crash litigators, and criminal defense counsel who need to understand both the value and limitations of cell phone evidence.
Read the full article:

Does a phone record prove active use? Learn how personal injury and criminal defense attorneys evaluate CDRs, data sessions, and forensic artifacts to determine actual phone use at the time of a crash or offense.

07/29/2026

A call or data record may be important, but it does not always prove who used a phone, whether the screen was active, or whether the device contributed to a crash or alleged offense.
For attorneys handling personal injury, commercial vehicle crash, or criminal defense cases, context matters.
Which type of evidence is most useful when evaluating actual phone use?
Vote in our poll and let us know your thoughts.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7488221593844981761

07/20/2026

"Phone records" isn't enough. 🛑 If your subpoenas are coming back with nothing but billing statements, you are missing the real evidence. In our latest blog post, we walk through the four common points of failure in carrier subpoenas, from UTC time zone traps to the complexities of serving MVNOs and VoIP providers. Make sure your next subpoena actually produces the evidence you need.
Check it out here:

For Personal Injury & Criminal Defense Attorneys Subpoenaing cell phone records from a carrier should be one of the most straightforward parts of discovery. In practice, it is often one of the most frustrating. Attorneys frequently spend weeks or even months waiting for records, only to receive inco...