In a Federal District Court in Louisiana stated the following in its decision. This decision cites specific areas that must be addressed properly by the investigator. Below is some of the wording in that decision.

“Courts largely agree that the peer-reviewed NFPA 921 embodies the standards of the field of fire investigation and causation.” “NFPA 921 is the most generally accepted standard for methodology for fire scene investigation.” “a hypothesis can be tested “physically by conducting experiments, analytically by applying accepted scientific principles, or by referring to scientific research.” “It further observes that “whenever the investigator relies on research as a means of hypothesis testing, references to the research relied upon should be acknowledged and cited.”

“Though XXXX’s theory seems possible, his report and subsequent deposition reveal two fatal flaws with his methodology that undercut its reliability: XXXX does not provide critical data, and he never tested his hypothesis.” “NFPA 921 makes clear that a hypothesis as to the cause of a fire should be tested before any cause can be officially determined.”

“Although physical experimentations and recreations are not the only means by which a hypothesis can be tested, XXXX did not even refer to any scientific research or publications that he used to test his hypothesis analytically.” “This Court agrees with the reasoning in those cases and finds that XXXX’s failure to test his hypothesis, combined with his failure to obtain the relevant data, renders his methodology unreliable.”

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group