The Fall 2020 edition of the Lincoln Memorial University Law Review contains two articles that may be of interest to fire investigators and fire litigators.

The first is my article, “A Model for Confronting Fire Investigation Errors.” It describes my general approach to fire investigation reviews and provides a roadmap for litigators to challenge fire investigation opinions. The article describes four cases, two cases of alleged arson and two subrogation cases alleging product defects. The article is located here:

[lmulawreview.scholasticahq.com]

I am giving away my playbook. This approach has been very effective over the last decade and it is my hope that its publication will lead to it becoming less effective in the future. You read that correctly. Forewarned is forearmed. If fire investigators know what kind of challenges to expect, those who apply themselves can learn to overcome these challenges. I hope that the knowledge obtained in getting ready for a challenge will help investigators to conduct more reliable investigations.

The second article, by Thomas May and David Icove, deals with arc mapping and Daubert challenges to its admission. The article, entitled “Arc Mapping Methodologies and the Pursuit of Magical Globules, Notches and Beads: A Bridge Too Far to Establish Fire Origin?”, argues that perhaps a metallurgist is required to identify an arc bead (a proposition that I’m not comfortable with), and that the technique is subject to numerous objections in a broad based Daubert challenge. The article may be found here:

[lmulawreview.scholasticahq.com]

John J. Lentini, CFI
Scientific Fire Analysis
Islamorada, FL
www.firescientist.com
scientific.fire@yahoo.com