My first question is to the 921 committee’s intent. If they leave in fire analysis and include in that the determination of responsibility, then I am being instructed to classify the fire event. What they did in the removing of the chapter on classification they hindered what they are asking the investigator to do. They are saying that if you conduct a fire analysis, I want you to do this, and at the same time but them giving less guidance and removing the chapter they are saying we are telling you to do a task but have choose not to give you guidance as to how to do it correctly. That seems to go against the original purpose of 921.

It is fine to say they are leaving classification to the local jurisdictions, but the problem is that many fire departments do not have or do not use the systems of classifications suggested by the committee. Then you have the fact that in the private sector there is no jurisdiction with guidance as to classification.

I agree with the comment about methodology and intent. I believe when you are getting into this area of an investigation you are more dependent on the preponderance of evidence than any specific methodology. The problem is that what I may see is evidence pro to my position as my view that same evidence and say it does not support what I’m saying. This is a very tricky area.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group