Mayer Consulting is proud to announce that Katherine has successfully passed the rigorous Certified Legal Investigator (CLI) examination, joining an elite group of fewer than 100 CLI-certified investigators worldwide, and only a handful in Texas.
The CLI designation represents the highest standard in legal investigation, requiring candidates to demonstrate mastery through comprehensive written examinations, oral ethical testing, role-playing scenarios, statement-taking evaluations, and white paper authorship. This certification, established by the National Association of Legal Investigators (NALI) in 1978, is recognized as “unparalleled in the history of the investigative profession.”
Katherine’s achievement underscores what sets Mayer Consulting apart: an unwavering commitment to professional excellence that elevates every aspect of our criminal defense investigation, mitigation, and jury services. When your client’s freedom depends on thorough, expert investigation, you need more than experience—you need proven expertise backed by the highest professional standards.
With Katherine’s CLI certification, Mayer Consulting continues to deliver the level of investigative excellence that Texas criminal defense attorneys demand and their clients deserve.
Below is Katherine’s whitepaper highlighting the pivotal role that handlebys played in a featured case.
Handlebys: A Tool to Strengthen Your Criminal Defense Case
By Katherine Mayer, M.A., CLI, CCDI
Introduction
Domestic violence cases often hinge on the credibility of a complaining witness (CW) and the narrative presented by the prosecution. Yet traditional discovery, like police reports, witness interviews, and medical records, often paints an incomplete picture. These sources may reflect what a witness said in the moment, but rarely contextualize behavioral history or credibility. This is where handlebys become essential. A handleby is an official record of any previous interaction a person has had with law enforcement, whether as a witness, victim, suspect, or reporting party.
When leveraged correctly, handlebys provide more than background, they expose patterns. They allow the defense to identify inconsistencies, uncover past unsubstantiated allegations, and introduce facts that shift the weight of the case. In allegations of aggravated assault, sexual misconduct, or domestic violence—where the outcome often hinges on believability rather than objective evidence—handlebys can be the difference between conviction and dismissal.
Case Study
In early 2024, an attorney hired a fact investigator to work an aggravated assault case. The investigator began by reviewing the probable cause affidavit, the offense report, and the responding officer’s bodycam footage. The CW statements, recorded in the heat of the moment, depicted the client as the aggressor. The prosecution presented a compelling narrative: a blood-covered apartment, a 911 call alleging a hammer attack, and a deeply emotional complaining witness. Despite this, the client adamantly denied the allegations. He described the incident as a culmination of long-standing manipulation and emotional abuse by the CW. The investigative approach emphasized context over assumption. Through a handleby request across multiple jurisdictions, the investigator uncovered numerous past reports involving the CW with similar allegations.
The next step was crucial: understanding the history of the relationship. The client explained that while they had recently moved together from another state, the relationship had been marked by turbulence long before they moved. This raised an important question: what was their history before coming to this jurisdiction? Had there been similar incidents in their past? And what about the CW—did she have a history of involvement with law enforcement, or was there more to her past than met the eye?
The results were startling. Over 35 records emerged, detailing a consistent pattern of allegations by the CW against various individuals. These incidents, strikingly similar to the current case, described violent confrontations, accusations of abuse, and claims of physical harm. While details varied, the core narrative was unmistakable.
Armed with only redacted police reports, the defense team requested the district attorney’s office seek unredacted versions from all jurisdictions where prior incidents occurred. Thankfully, the defense attorney saw the value in these records and fought for a hearing when the DA denied their request. The Judge ruled in their favor.
What Counts as a Handleby?
Handlebys are not confined to criminal complaints. They include:
- Police reports (regardless of case outcome)
- 911 call logs and dispatch summaries
- Civil protective orders (granted or denied)
- Prior affidavits, victim statements, or contradictory testimony
- Investigative notes, incident logs, and field interviews
Many of these records are overlooked simply because they fall outside the standard discovery process. Yet they can contain statements that conflict with a witness’s current version of events, or show a long-standing tendency to escalate interpersonal disputes into criminal allegations.
Accessing Handlebys
Public records access varies widely by jurisdiction, and poorly crafted requests often return little of value. A records specialist drafts broad, yet legally sound FOIA requests, leveraging public records statutes to ensure maximum return. Investigators can ask for incident types, case numbers, call summaries, and dispatch logs tied to the CW across known addresses or aliases. If requests are denied due to privacy claims, redactions, or vague justifications, prepare to escalate through appeals or reword requests.
Critically, defense teams must push for disclosure of underlying documentation, not just summaries. A prior claim that was “unfounded” on its face might still include statements that show motive, bias, or fabrication. Granular details, such as tone, language, or escalation patterns, carry evidentiary weight.
What the Research Says
The use of handlebys aligns with growing academic critiques of the frameworks used to interpret domestic violence and assault allegations. In Stop the Gaslighting, attorneys Steve Brand and Deniz Kadirhan reveal how advocacy narratives often eclipse empirical data. They trace the evolution of models like the Duluth Model and Power and Control Wheel, both widely used in courtrooms despite lacking peer-reviewed scientific foundations.
The 2007 Whitaker et al. study found that in nonreciprocally violent relationships, women initiated violence more than 70% of the time, and nearly half of all partner violence was mutual. These findings, based on over 18,000 heterosexual relationships, challenge the idea that violence always flows from male power and control.
Further, a 2023 systematic review in Trauma, Violence & Abuse concluded that bidirectional violence is the most common form, with no significant differences in perpetration by gender. These findings contradict the presumption that female complainants are always truthful or that male defendants are typically aggressors. The implications for defense attorneys are enormous.
When “Science” Becomes Strategy
Despite this data, many courts allow domestic violence “experts” to testify based on models not rooted in rigorous science. Testimony about trauma, delayed disclosure, or recantation is often treated as a universal truth. Defense teams must be prepared to challenge these assertions, especially when the expert has no direct knowledge of the case and relies on theoretical constructs.
As Stop the Gaslighting outlines, courts have allowed such testimony even when experts admit under oath they cannot cite supporting studies. The reliance on government-funded training materials, like the Texas Family Violence Benchbook, further cements biased frameworks that dismiss the possibility of false or manipulated allegations.
Using Handlebys in Defense Strategy
Handlebys should not be an afterthought. They are a foundational investigative tool that can inform case strategy from day one. Practical steps include:
- Conducting jurisdictional searches tied to CW’s prior residences
- Matching allegations across time to identify recurring claims or language
- Comparing past and current statements for evolution or contradiction
- Challenging expert testimony based on generalizations or anecdotal science
- Using handleby findings to push for Brady disclosures or reduced charges
In many cases, handlebys expose not only false claims, but also external influences shaping the CW’s narrative. Therapists, advocacy groups, family members, and anyone with proximity may help frame a story in ways that support ideological or emotional goals over factual integrity.
Ethics and Limitations
The power of handlebys lies in their objectivity, not in character assassination. The goal is not to discredit someone unjustly but to contextualize their credibility based on facts. Defense teams must be careful to frame findings professionally and ensure that claims are backed by verifiable documentation.
Due process demands skepticism toward all narratives, prosecution and defense alike. That skepticism must be informed by evidence, not assumptions.
A Return to Fact-Based Justice
In a justice system increasingly shaped by advocacy, ideology, and emotion, handlebys are a return to facts. They balance the scales in cases where one person’s version of events might otherwise dictate the outcome. Defense attorneys must push for their systematic use, not as a gimmick, but as a disciplined, data-driven tool of investigation.
When applied thoughtfully, handlebys don’t just win cases, they restore faith in the integrity of the process. Investigate. Challenge. Defend.
Citations
- Brand, S., Kadirhan, D. (2025). Stop the Gaslighting [Article submitted for publication].
- Whitaker, D. J., Haileyesus, T., Swahn, M., & Saltzman, L. S. (2007). Differences in frequency of violence and reported injury between relationships with reciprocal and nonreciprocal intimate partner violence. American Journal of Public Health. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1854883/
- Machado, A., Sousa, C., & Cunha, O. (2023). Bidirectional violence in intimate relationships: A systematic review.Trauma, Violence & Abuse. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15248380231193440
- McQueen, D. (2011). Domestic violence is most commonly reciprocal. The Psychiatrist, Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-psychiatrist/article/domestic-violence-is-most-commonly-reciprocal/C5432B0C6F8F61B49A4E2B60B931FA07
