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: So no causes what do yall think.
Posted by:
J L Mazerat (IP Logged)
Date: July 28, 2021 08:30AM
You are correct. However, this inference is subjective and not based on science. Convicting a person on circumstantial evidence changes by the state. There is no one size fits all. In Louisiana one using circumstantial evidence to convict a person is not based on beyond a reasonable doubt, must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. This takes it back into the general area of the scientific method and proving a hypothesis. All it takes if for the opposing side to show that a reasonable person can look at these same facts and draw a different conclusion. Here one goes into what was the person thinking.
Here’s where I talked to several psychologist and psychiatrist, they all agree that when it comes to a person setting a fire there is like a separate chapter for the evaluation of these persons that must be used in an evaluation in order to determine a person’s intent. If they feel this is a specialized field of study, do you think a fire investigator is qualified to conduct these types of assessment.
Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group