Abigail Stepnitz

Expert Witness · Civil Litigation

When the question is whether an institution should have known.

Expert opinions on human-trafficking identification standards and the credibility of survivor accounts — the indicators a reasonable actor was positioned to recognize, benchmarked against established international frameworks.

Request CV Available for new matters
300+
Expert opinions, reports and testimony
15+ yrs
Trafficking & asylum practice and scholarship
01

Expert opinion to move the question.

Retained in TVPA / TVPRA and related civil matters where liability turns on what was knowable, and on whether a survivor’s account can be believed.

Identification

Trafficking indicators a reasonable institution should have recognized

What the recognized warning signs are, how they present in operational settings, and how my opinion maps to the “knew or should have known” standard.

Credibility

Expert assessment that is trauma-informed

How credible accounts of exploitation are produced, disclosed, and too often wrongly disqualified — grounded in the mechanics of trauma, memory, and disclosure rather than assumption.

Standards

Institutional failure measured against international benchmarks

Systemic identification failures assessed against national referral frameworks — the standards a competent actor is expected to meet.

02

The account the record turns on.

My work sits where two systems meet: how trafficking is identified, and how the accounts of trafficked people are tested for belief. For fifteen years — in tribunals, in national policy, and in scholarship — I have examined how institutions decide whose account of harm counts as credible, and what follows when they decline to recognize it.

That is the same question a TVPA civil jury confronts. Liability for an institutional defendant rests on whether it knew or should have known. Proving “should have known” requires someone who can state, with rigor, which indicators were present, what a competent actor would have seen, and why a survivor’s account holds together even where it is imperfect.

I provide assessments, written reports, declarations, and testimony that are clear, defensible on cross, and anchored in established standards rather than impression.

03

Background.

Academic
Assistant Professor of Political Science, University of San Diego. I hold a PhD in Jurisprudence and Social Policy from UC Berkeley Law School. Research on credibility assessment, procedural legitimation, and how legal systems construct recognition.
Testifying
More than 300 expert reports in asylum and trafficking matters.
Policy
UK National Coordinator on Trafficking, the Poppy Project — national-level identification and victim-support practice.
International
Consultant to the European Commission on trafficking and related protection standards, including the frameworks now used to benchmark institutional conduct.
04

How an engagement works.

Straightforward, retainer-based, and structured to respect your timeline.

First

Conflict check & scope call

A brief, no-charge call to confirm fit, identify the opinion the matter needs, and clear conflicts before anything begins.

Then

Retainer & record review

Engagement on a retainer against an hourly rate. I review the record and frame the opinion against the governing standards.

Deliverable

Report, declaration, testimony

A written report or declaration, with deposition and trial testimony as the matter requires. Clear, cross-ready, defensible.

Retain or consult

Tell me about the matter. I’ll tell you whether I’m the right expert.

Available for civil litigation, including TVPA / TVPRA trafficking matters, and for case consultation and strategy. CV available on request.