Fire/Arson Investigations :  Fire/Arson Investigations The fastest message board... ever.
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: NFPA 921 - CA Court Ruling- Expert Testimony Rejected in Total
Posted by: COfire (IP Logged)
Date: October 17, 2019 10:01AM

Thanks for posting. This line:
"Dr. XXX's further explanation as to why he did not conduct a full fire investigation, pursuant to NFPA 921, was that he felt these standards were unnecessary for him to render a conclusion as to the origin and cause." got me thinking.

Why do neither of the national level certification agencies address the use of 921 in their code of ethics? It would seem like a good way to weed out people who get the certification and then choose not to follow any of the standards of care (i.e. 921). You get a certification and then under deposition admit you don't need to use the document the certification is based on? Grounds for non-renewal in my opinion.



Subject Views Written By Posted
  NFPA 921 - CA Court Ruling- Expert Testimony Rejected in Total 1134 Chris Bloom, CJBFireConsultant 10/15/2019 06:11PM
  Re: NFPA 921 - CA Court Ruling- Expert Testimony Rejected in Total 629 Sir Gary 10/16/2019 01:20AM
  Re: NFPA 921 - CA Court Ruling- Expert Testimony Rejected in Total 647 COfire 10/17/2019 10:01AM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.