A Professional Encounter with Dr. David Greenfield
In July 2008 we began searching the web for an expert that specialized in addictive behavior patterns. After reading Dr. Greenfield’s web site we felt he would be capable in this specialty. On July 21st, our lawyer contacted him and asked Dr. Greenfield if he would be willing to consult with a client that had displayed addictive behavior through Internet child pornography. The client’s sentencing hearing was scheduled for August 27th, so time was short. Our question was: Would Dr. Greenfield have the time and the inclination to write a paper about this client for the sentencing judge to read? The client had been through extensive psychological evaluation and that evaluation could be forwarded to Dr. Greenfield immediately.
Dr. Greenfield accepted the assignment and stated that this addictive behavior was becoming more pronounced at this time and that he knew well the problems. He stated that he also was short of time as he had a scheduled vacation planned for the first two weeks of August but would do the paper for the judge (and us) before he left on vacation. We immediately sent him his requested $3,000.00 fee in advance payment at the rate of $500.00 per hour. Very, very expensive but as the supportive family in a case such as this, we felt that a statement from an expert on addictive behavior would clarify addictive behavior to the judge. Our lawyer then sent through FedX, that same day, the client’s psychiatric evaluation. So, within three days of the initial contact with Dr. Greenfield, he had all necessary materials and his full payment. In fact, Dr. Greenfield shows in his record keeping that he spent 60 minutes analyzing the case on July 29th. Below are the records from Dr. Greenfield:
7/21- 10’ initial phone call with Atty Trant
7/23- 5’ phone call with Atty Trant
7/29- 60’ review of case records
And then we did not hear anything more. Dr. Greenfield did not submit his rough draft report until 2 days before the sentencing hearing. We had worked very hard to have all materials that we could possibly supply (letters from family and friends attesting to the character of the accused) submitted before August. We have no idea why Dr. Greenfield did not send this report in a timely manner but when we did receive it, it was not of high quality – it was basically a Word cut and paste job lacking in the personal touch that we had thought would be part of the expensive paper that we had paid for. Our lawyer never gave the presiding judge Dr. Greenfield’s draft paper. It only arrived via email two days before the sentencing hearing; the judge would hardly have had time to read it.
When we questioned Dr. Greenfield about his cut and paste report and the lateness of his report he simply told us that we were questioning him as we were unhappy because of the severity of the judge’s sentencing. Perhaps. But, we were also searching for some justification for the fee of $3,000.00 and the reason for the extreme lateness of the report’s submission.
Below are the records Dr. Greenfield submitted to us that was his response to our query. As you can see he started working on his report on August 20th, weeks later than he had promised us when we sent him the $3,000.00 fee. Our lawyer told us the report by Dr. Greenfield was of “cut and paste” quality, not the quality we had expected from a professional in this field.
8/20- 180’ research/report preparation
8/21- 20’ phone call with Atty Trant
822- Left message on VM for Atty Trant
8/25- left message for VM or Atty Trant
8/22, 8/24, 8/25, 8/26 – 150’ report review and edit
8/26 or 8/27? – Phone call with Atty Trant
The sentencing was August 27th – as you can see from above, Dr. Greenfield’s report was submitted not even a week before the sentencing. He did not submit it timely and he did not act professionally when he submitted the report so very late. There was never time for the presiding judge to read this report – whether or not it would have had any influence we will never know.
This is written to alert the future clients of Dr. David Greenfield of his less than professional treatment to us. Professional means timely – in business if you are late with a delivery the delivery is cancelled; in law school if you submit a brief late it is a zero mark. Dr. Greenfield was very aware that this date existed, we presented it immediately, he agreed to it and then he reneged on his commitment to be timely. Of course, we have not had any of his fee returned – it was an easy $3,000.00 for him.