Everything needs to be taken in context. I am sorry, but the sequence of your comment gave the impression that he left after the deposition. First you made comment as to the information from the deposition. Then you talk about him not know the definition of watt among other definitions he could not answer. Then you talk about him being unqualified because of his skills in reading patterns in a room that was fully involved. (The room he described did not meet NFPA 921’s definition of a fully involved room.) You said he had the person arrested for murder. (It seems like the affidavit for the arrest was completed by another person.) Then your statement is, “Fortunately this particular has left the business.” You did not inform the readers that this person was no longer conduction investigations for almost two years prior to the deposition. Sorry if I misunderstood because of the presentation as to when you were saying he left the business.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group