Funny, I said when I started this thread that I would give my opinion, but I never did.

Let me start by saying that I think the terminology should be changed at some point, because obviously there are areas where this simplistic approach is not adequate.

Now, like I said, I didn't actually work this fire scene, but have some intimate knowledge about it since my partner did. There is no doubt that this is an accidental fire based on both the fire scene and interviews. Again the problem is which accident occurred? My partner posed the question Accidental or Undetermined, which should it be? My answer to him is Undetermined or Accidental would work in this scenario.

The deciding factor? No crime was committed and crime is our major focus. Our job is not civil litigation. You can write an identical conclusion listing both ignition scenarios and call the fire accidental and it will land you in civil depositions/court which keeps us away from what we are supposed to be doing, which is putting bad guys in jail.

Now, you write the exact same conclusion, word for word, and call it undetermined instead of accidental and you don't get deposed.

I am not sure which he chose, but I would call it accidental. Reason? I do not hesitate to call something undetermined if I don't know what started the fire. That being said if I am absolutely sure that it was an accident, I have no problem justifying it in a deposition or in court even if I don't know which specific ignition scenario occurred. My position? Let the folks billing by the hour figure which faulted first, the chicken or the egg.

Anyway, this is my opinion, but you know what opinions are like.