Stanislaus County (California) is trying a new approach to counter the insidious problem of fire investigators being exposed and potentially influenced by task irrelevant information.

[www.modbee.com]

At some point in the near future, forward thinking attorneys (both prosecutors and defense attorneys, pre-trial and post-conviction) are going to be making compelling arguments that expert conclusions made in the absence of formally adopted guidelines and policies to effectively shield the examiner from domain irrelevant information are per se unreliable.

In other words, a Daubert challenge (or something similar) based not on questioning the reliability of the underlying methodology or the expertise of the witness, but instead based on a lack of written protocols designed to proactively shield the expert from inappropriate and potentially basing information. 

To avoid this, fire investigators will have to decide if they want to be forensic experts or criminal investigators. The idea that they can be both (at the same time and on the same case) will be thrown in the dustbin of history along with crazed glass and spalled concrete.

The steps being taken in Stanislaus County are good start.