John, I am as passionate as you when it comes to sending people to jail for something there is no scientific proof to support the conviction. Unfortunately some of the cases I have observed the testimony that has led to conviction is coming from those that can answer the question you suggest. I will not disagree the person should have an understanding of those terms but as to reciting a definition I do not believe that is a help. I have seen good investigators that could not give you the definition of those terms but did hove the knowledge and the experience to evaluate the conditions present. As an example, the was a problem with an electrical circuit that failed and caused the fire. This investigator I would bet could not off the top of his head give you the explanation of energy and power and how they were different. What this person did have is experience in electrical wiring and how it should be done as well as knowing what could take place if it fails. His side job was a licensed electrician for 30 years. He could explain how the faulty connection could cause the generation of heat sufficient to cause a fire. What I am saying is that it is just as important to have the actual knowledge as to just the book knowledge. I would not want a person that could cite the definition or concepts and has little knowledge as to what actually takes place in the field. I have seen electrical engineers design an electrical system and the person installing the system saying it will not work if installed that way. It was installed as designed and the system did not work. Went the alterations suggested by the installer were made the system worked. I am sure the engineer could answer the questions about energy and power but I doubt if the installer would give the answer that was in the book. There is much more to this problem that saying if a person does not know the difference between power and energy that he cannot determine if the fire was intentionally set.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group