A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator.
Re: Cause of the Fire
Posted by:
SJAvato (IP Logged)
Date: July 14, 2006 11:44AM
I have done some "lecturing" on the subject and present a scenario involving a vacant house and a vagrant trying to keep warm. The poor guy sets a small fire in the bathtub that gets out of hand. Is the fire accidental? Yes. Is it Incendiary? Yes (The vagrant had no legal right to be in the property and knew the fire shouldn't be set under those conditions.) If the vagrant is unvailable to be interviewed and determine state of mind / intention: Is it Undetermined? Yes. An equally compelling arguement can be made for any of those causes given the same fact set. All can be logically valid and defensible. (A situation I have referred to as "Avato's Conundrum") Purists argue (again) that it MUST be undetermined. But accidental or incendiary are equally appropriate depending on your approach to the problem. Then there are "external" factors that may shade your call under these circumstances. Suppose the city elders promise a reduction in crime. Would a public investigator continue to call this an arson if it meant increasing crime stats? Would you call it undetermined if your boss said that "Undetermined" is unacceptable. (You're not paid and trained to say "I don't know." )
This is not an abstract thought experiment. There are real world cases like this and it requires some real serious thought to muddle through.
Steve