Five Different Cases of Fire Investigation - Assignment Example

Fire investigation Name Date 1. When there is an outbreak of fire in a building the interaction of hot gases with the walls forms patterns known as heat and smoke horizons. The difference between heat and smoke horizon is that heat horizons is shown by demarcation of fire damage shown by burning or discoloration of walls while smoke horizon are surface deposits that shows the height at which smoke stained the walls with no heat damage [2]. As the fire move from one compartment to another, it creates certain patterns on the walls and ceilings. The patterns are normally straight lines that are parallel to the floor and ceiling. The patterns record what was happening when the structure was burning. Horizons are analyzed depending on the strength of burning and the progress of its effect. For example when a building burns, the marks of the heat start forming from the top of the room due to the hot air rising from the fire, the marks reduces on the walls. If the conditions of the rooms’ walls are different, it shows where most heat was applied. The direction of the horizons shows where the smoke and heat was heading to and where it was coming from. Smoke horizon resulting from hot gases [2] Flashovers can interfere with the smoke and heat horizons since the gas layers descend to the floor level. The presence of smoke and heat horizons in a burned structure is sufficient evidence to conclude that there were no flashovers in that compartment. Another thing that could interfere with horizons is in situation in which the walls of the building collapses and burn in basement [1]. Interference with horizon interferes with investigation because what was happening when the structure was burning cannot be known and in some occasions it assists in the investigation. The absence of confinement in some occasion is important because fires that originate from attic in many occasion cause ventilation of the roof before the ceiling collapse, that means there will be no confinement, such fires are normally caused by lighting. Knowing what was happening during burning can help investigators trace where the fire started from. The artifacts produced through confinement of hot gases can assist in tracing the origin of fire. When the horizons patterns are drawn on the building walls, there is likelihood that the artifacts were recorded on the walls before the room ceiling fall down. Heat horizon produced by hot gases [2] 2. Chain of evidence is a series of events that when viewed in sequence can lead to what could have caused what is being investigated. In situation of fire outbreak, the investigators will be trying to find out what cause the fire whether arson or accident, how it spreads, the speed in which it spread, the damage caused, and whether it could have been stopped [3]. The chain of evidence is important because it helps the investigators know what caused the fire. The investigators can talk to the occupiers of the building to find out whether they have an idea of what could be the cause; the occupiers might have seen when the fire was starting. Knowing the cause will assist in preventing the problem in future and if it was as a result of arsonist it will help in bring the culprits to book. If the building was insured, it will assist the occupiers of those who lost properties seek compensation from insurance companies. Knowing where the fire originated from assist in tracing the cause, where the fire starts from always get burned most, more horizons will be found in the walls around that point [3]. The evidence will help in knowing whether the building conform to the required standard. For example whether there were enough fire exits and the right ventilation. Lack of enough exits lead to death. When the ventilation is poor the fire will be starved from oxygen and it will go off, but with good ventilation it will get enough oxygen and burn rapidly. 3. More than two ignitions that cause a fire is not necessarily the work of an arsonist. An example is during Christmas or birthday celebrations, candles are normally used for celebration. In many occasions several of it are let and put in various points of the room [3]. Incase those using it for celebration forget and leave the room, it can cause fire. If it was placed in inflammable material, it will burn the material when it is about to end, with several candles in the room lit at the same time it means it will likely get finished at the same time hence causing several ignition. In another situation in, power fluctuation can cause short circuit in electrical appliances in the house such as televisions and radios when left on. When there is power outage, the moment it goes on it might return with high voltage. If electrical television, radio, and other electrical appliances were left on, it might burn their fuses causing it to melt. The melting can reach ignition temperatures in the electrical appliances and initiate a self-sustaining exothermic oxidation reaction or fire and it will cause fire in the room. There will be more than two sources of fire in the room. 4. The case study on state of Georgia v john Metcalf and Kimberly Post analyzed the case in which Robin the wife of John Metcalf was found dead in his house after it was consumed by fire. The two have been living together as a husband and wife but there relationship was marred by difficulties. The purpose of the author of this case was to show that the investigators did not do their work well and their investigations did not ascertain what really caused the fire and the death of Robin [2]. The author tried to show where the investigators went wrong in their investigation. The author has valid evidence to disapprove the investigators arguments, investigators arguments do not add up. According to the investigator when the house burned the backdoor was opened and it was left by John after setting the house on fire. But after further investigation by the author it found that the backdoor was closed as from the evidence of hinges, the hinges shows that the door was closed, the investigators had failed to examine the hinges [2]. The investigators also misinterpreted some analysis by believing that radiant patterns in the floor were as a result of ignitable liquids. They looked upon the evidence of clothing in the hunger, on the floor and match sticks on the bedroom floor. The radiant patterns might have been cause by burning clothes and present of match stick there shows that the fire might have started there. The only remaining evidence before the case was taken to court was presence of toluene and dipropylene, this chemical is normally present in new clothes and the way in which analysis was carried out was faulty. Rear of the house [2] The author was biased in some areas for example it failed to look into the conflict that John and Robin had, in such a conflict there is a possibility that John could have killed Robin in order to get rid of her and continue living with robin. The court rule that the two was not guilty and it was possible that Robin was trying to burn John clothes as a result of anger, after setting the fire he went to bathroom and unfortunately since there was inflammable materials the fire expanded fast without Robin knowing and unfortunately she was choked by the smoke and died. This is in line with the author argument. References [1] International Association of Fire Chiefs., International Association of Arson Investigators., & National Fire Protection Association. (2012). Fire investigator: Principles and practice to NFPA 921 and 1033. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. [2] Lentini, J. J. (2012). Scientific protocols for fire investigation, Second edition (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [3] T.C. Forensic: Article 12 - BASICS OF FIRE INVESTIGATION. Retrieved November 11, 2016, from http://www.tcforensic.com.au/docs/article12.html Read More