Chapter 3 - Arson

Abstract

This chapter is a thorough overview of the complexities of current fire science. It will cover how scientifically flawed arson investigations have led to wrongful convictions, including Cameron Willingham's wrongful conviction and execution in Texas, US. One cause of errors is that the suspect methods used in Willingham and many other cases were not undertaken by scientists. Although fire cause determination requires expertise in chemistry, heat transfer, fluid dynamics, and electricity, historic arson curricula commonly still rests on mentorship training of public safety officers throughout US jurisdictions. Unfortunately, mentorship can reinforce outdated and nonscientific assumptions, thereby lacking an academic basis of hypothesis testing and method validation. Recent history tells us that this information gap results in convictions based on fire folklore. Attorneys and other stakeholders of forensic science techniques need to be aware of the basic scientifically proven concepts fire investigators should master in order to make accurate fire cause determinations. To be more specific, it is important to know that postfire physical characteristics, once incorrectly relied upon as proof of arson, are now known to be the result of “flashover” and are also seen in accidental fires. Although there is evidence of significant progress and the science of fire cause determination is becoming dominant over the old interpretations, in practice, there is still a significant cadre of investigators who believe the mentored myths and are unable to apply science properly to their investigations because they are undereducated in basic physical science. Attorneys and the courts must demand that arson convictions are no longer founded on folklore and rely only upon experts who understand the science of fires.