Fire/Arson Investigations : Fire/Arson Investigations
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: Is 921 a Standard of Care?
Posted by: J L Mazerat (IP Logged)
Date: November 16, 2016 09:07AM
Based on the courts comments you are right that the methodology addressed in 921, "the scientific method" better be learned by those conducting any investigation related to fires.
I disagree, based on the renderings of the court that it nothing more than a guide. They are not saying it is a standard but are indicating they believe when it comes to judging one's investigation that it is the standard of care that must be reached by the person conducting the investigation.
The courts seem to be going along with you in that they are saying if one chooses to say it is nothing more than a guide, they better have some methodology that has been accepted in their profession.
The days of investigators trying to get around 921 by saying it is just a guide is over. The courts have made that decision when it comes to the evaluation of the methodology used to conduct the investigation. You as an investigator may want to say it is just a guide but the courts are saying they will be using it as a standard of care that must be met by your investigation.
Just as many did not accept 921 when it was first printed, those same persons what to use the fact that NFPA only designates it as a guide to support their reasoning for not complying with its instruction as to how to conduct an investigation. The courts are saying the investigator can make that distinction if they want but the court will use it as a the standard of care for those conducting fire investigations. The courts are not going away, so we as a profession might as well suck it up and understand how this document will be used in the evaluation of our investigations.
Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group
I disagree, based on the renderings of the court that it nothing more than a guide. They are not saying it is a standard but are indicating they believe when it comes to judging one's investigation that it is the standard of care that must be reached by the person conducting the investigation.
The courts seem to be going along with you in that they are saying if one chooses to say it is nothing more than a guide, they better have some methodology that has been accepted in their profession.
The days of investigators trying to get around 921 by saying it is just a guide is over. The courts have made that decision when it comes to the evaluation of the methodology used to conduct the investigation. You as an investigator may want to say it is just a guide but the courts are saying they will be using it as a standard of care that must be met by your investigation.
Just as many did not accept 921 when it was first printed, those same persons what to use the fact that NFPA only designates it as a guide to support their reasoning for not complying with its instruction as to how to conduct an investigation. The courts are saying the investigator can make that distinction if they want but the court will use it as a the standard of care for those conducting fire investigations. The courts are not going away, so we as a profession might as well suck it up and understand how this document will be used in the evaluation of our investigations.
Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.