You Might Go to Prison, Even Though You're Innocent by Justin Brooks

Author:Justin Brooks
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9780520386839
Publisher: University of California Press

ARSON

Another area of forensic science where jurors have often relied on faulty expert testimony is fire science. Like the faulty causal connection between the triad of symptoms present in baby death cases and alleged wrongful actions by caregivers, many experts have changed their analysis in recent years as to the indicators of an intentionally set fire. Just as Patrick Barnes changed his opinions on the causes of baby death after the Louise Woodward case, John Lentini, one of the leading experts in fire investigation, changed his mind about fire science in 1991. In that year, there was a massive wildfire in Oakland, California, that destroyed more than three thousand homes and created a lab for fire experts to study the causes of fire. It was clear the homes were destroyed by the fire spreading from house to house and were not intentionally started. However, when Lentini examined the homes, he found evidence that he’d always believed were signs of arson.

For example, webs of window cracks after a fire, known as crazed glass, had always been the hallmark of an arsonist using an accelerant (like gasoline) to create very hot fires. Yet, one out of four destroyed homes had signs of crazed glass. After conducting further experiments, forensic scientists discovered that “crazing” resulted from rapid cooling, not rapid heating.16 Pipes and metal bedsprings melted throughout the homes; this was also typically associated with arson and the use of accelerants.17

When Lentini examined the Oakland fire, he’d come from a recent investigation in Florida where a man was facing the death penalty for setting a fire that killed his pregnant wife, his sister, and his four nieces and nephews. The man claimed his son was playing with a lighter and accidentally started the fire on the couch in the living room. Because it appeared there were multiple points of ignition in the home, as is typical in arson cases, the initial conclusion by investigators was that the fire must have been intentionally set with the arsonist pouring accelerants and starting the fire throughout the house.18

Fortuitously, a similar house was being torn down in the Oakland area neighborhood, so Lentini decided to do an experiment. He staged the house in the same way as the one that was burned down and placed cameras throughout the house. He then started a fire on the couch, just as the defendant claimed it had occurred. Lentini expected it would show the man was lying, but it proved the opposite.

There were V-shaped burn patterns throughout the house, the kind that had been used in the past to determine where a fire started. The phenomenon known as “flashover,” where the contents of a room can suddenly and simultaneously ignite, gave the appearance of multiple points of ignition in the home when, in fact, there was only one. The combination of almost sending a man to death row based on mistaken conclusions and what he learned from the Oakland fire made Lentini question all that he had ever learned.19

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.