I know, but as professionals should they be shooting the bird here, and how do they get away with it? Heck, I might as well do it too. Here goes . I know that's not the bird, I was afraid to use it. Better to have a beer than get kicked off this forum for a week.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

>< I can't help but notice that several persons including Dave, Pat and Dr. Munger (sorry guys) have given the bird >< in their posts? How can they get away with that?
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Chris, you missed one. I just did a quick search for 'cry baby', Jim Mazerat (sorry Jim) wrote, "Stuart you sound like a cry baby." Does that count?
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

'cry baby'?....he said 'cry baby'....wow! Come on Chris you are taking sides. You don't like people who call someone 'cry baby'. Know what you claim you don't like people saying things on this site without giving all the case citations to back it up. Yet you cite such things as "numerous private emails" of people complaining. Love that secr
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Right your are Chris! Not only that .....it's a matter of Home Security..let's detain then......and then........let's burn the books.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

I note your comments do not claim that any States license requirements require any education, training or expertise as a fire investigator as a prerequisite to obtaining a license, nor any certifications by relevant agencies or organizations. It brought tears to my eyes when you described the pain and suffering the the States go through to license PI's. I do agree with you in that most
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Right you are James. In fact I do believe if one were to take a close look at PI licensing laws, for the most part when the include experts under the licensing requirement such as Fire Investigators they really are nothing more than a method of taxation under the guise of protecting the public. No mater how you cut it PI Licensures is simply put Taxation.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

John, Thanks and you are of course right .... your suggested perhaps more persuasive phrase is admittedly nicer that my "crap"......I couldn't help it though it just rolled off my tongue. I just throught when I read it....'that's a load of crap' and didn't really stop to think of a better way to say it. As to the photos, I can understand all that.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Question 1 - an emphatic YES. Question 2 - the two mentioned possibilities should be added with the cautions you mentioned. Frankly, the proferred reasoning for the denial seems to me to be crap.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

For those who are interested, an interesting article on the NJ Supreme Court decision on this subject at:
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

What you did do was make for a lively exchange of views on this important subject. Thanks.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Jim, well and reasonably put.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

"You asked "At this point should he be held responsible for no longer having the notes?" The answer is that it all depends. There is not enough information in your hypothetical. I am sure we have all heard and given that same answer more than once. Nevertheless, here is the the best answer I can think of at the moment, and I reserve the right to think of others later if I
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

The court in this case reasoned well the importance and limitations of NFPA 921. See the last paragraph of the courts opinion.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Jim, To me it is pretty simply, one has an obligation to preserve all of the relevant data only so long as ones client has an interest in the matter. It may be that other parties have may have an interest that lasts longer than the client, but that begs the question does the other party have a right to the data, and does the investigator owe any obligation to another party to preserve the dat
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Dave, absolutely nothing. George
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Jim, did I just read this right, looks like you wrote "If the information is detrimental to their side I do not believe they have any requirement to produce information that is not required by law." WOW, surely you do not mean that. What about the idea that it is a crime to destroy evidence. What about ethical considerations? What about moral considerations? What ab
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

I am looking for an EE with expertise in the forensic evaluation of computer equipment in regards to identification of involvement in fire causation. The person will be expected to have qualification to testify as an expert in deterimination of fire cause involving computer equipment. In this case, at this time I an looking for forensic evaluation of a CPU, and external hard drive along with th
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Finally some really good thoughts/discussions about a very interesting and helpful topic. Thanks.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Oh my goodness, I think you might be Pat.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

rD. semaJ, Thanks for that clarification. eoreG.....oops I mean egroeG......it's a difficult thang that backards spell'n.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Jim, just what in the heck what is you face thing .doing? Sorry but I just had to ask.
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

How about this reason Because the darkness hates the light?
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Just curious, what is the point of having a forum one has to be registered with, that yet allows posters to be anonymous?
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations

Just curious. What makes you think that Mr. DeHaan is a Doctor? What does he hold his doctorate degree in? Who conferred the doctorate upon him. What was the subject of his doctoral thesis? G. Van Doren, CFI
Forum: Fire/Arson Investigations