Arson case with animation to demonstrate my thoughts as to how I thought this fire occured.
My firm was asked to review a file for the defense dealing with an arson case. The fire involved 2 vehicles located in a garage. Although I could be able to support my opinions by explaining them, I decided to have an animation made as a demonstrative view as to my theories.
The contents in this animation were all based on the condition of the physical evidence as well as the investigating police officer's statements and the statements made by the insurance investigator, claiming the fire was deliberately set. First there were two points of origin and then there were four. Instead of looking at this fire as two separate fires I needed to find a link where it was one fire.
I contacted "Legal Animators" located in Indianapolis, Indiana to prepare this animation. I found them to be very insightful, plus they listened to exactly what I needed, the first time. I gave them the statements made by the prosecution's investigators with my thoughts on how this fire was not two separate fires like presented, but one accidental fire.
For anyone needing such animation, I would highly recommend this firm.
My client was facing felony counts for years before I got involved with this case.
Rough synopsis of my report
Reading the Highland Park Police report I see that the statement was made that things were not in the original place and were moved during the fire departments overhaul. Over haul in this sense means clean up to make sure fire is completely suppressed.
This can contain a great amount of variables because the scene was no longer the same at the time of the fire.
What concerns me is that the fire on the Volvo was considered the first fire. Using this scenario, anyone would have to believe this is a set fire because no ignition sources existed other than a possible lit flare which set off liquid ignitable that poured down the trunk lid.
Now, we know we have accelerants on the floor. There were supposedly three flares by the left tire of the BMW. There are the remains of a melted gas container. There is fire damage to the burlap. There is damage to the socket end of the blue extension cord.
The investigator apparently assumed the damage to the connector was from an outer heat source and as far as I can understand, he did not take the accompanying connected components (the heaters) in which he states they were both plugged in.
I visited the garage and tried to place everything as it was outlined in my mind comparing to the photographs. From the statement the defendant made and the confirmation by the police officer directly after the fire, the circuit breaker remained tripped. This may have been the result or the cause of the fire. If open flame from burning the burlap reached the gas container (depending on the amount of gas in the container) that would be enough to accelerate the fire (Depending on the oxygen in the garage) a number of feet high. The fire then would have traveled to the snow blower on the east wall set the tire on fire with the flames reaching the plastic tank and the flames could have climbed momentarily up the door (Out line seen in picture), could have gone over to the painted drywall ceiling, burning the paint with flaming debris from the paint dropping onto the car cover, setting off whatever accelerants were on the trunk of the Volvo in turn, lighting the flares.
In other words, the whole scenario as to what most likely happened would be much different if the trunk of the Volvo was not considered the first fire and actually an extension of the other fire, which was confirmed to do great damage to the bumper cover and the left fender of the BMW.
My theory at least makes sense in the fact that it can connect the two fires.
Evidence: Highland Park PD removed the remains of the flares. They cut the extension cord in which destroyed valuable evidence. Why was it not left hooked up to the two heaters? Why was the socket the extension cord plugged into not removed? In order to preserve the evidence, one does not just pick what he wants from a scene. The cord should not have been cut. It’s strange. The police appeared to take only the components that would be convenient to their case, where we are now left trying to put together viable theories because the police only appeared to get part of the story.
I see no tests to the heaters for electrical failure. One heater was confirmed to be on. Why would the police not take the heaters? I see nothing about any possibility of an electrical failure.
The theory of the first fire as its called on the Volvo trunk is where a flare set the fire. The flares may have burned on the trunk and I see no comments on the passenger side of the trunk in which a liquid flaming ignitable rolled down that side of the trunk. Why was the trunk lid left to rust when, it too was a key part of the evidence of what was supposedly the first fire. Why was the trunk lid examined for one major hot point that may have confirmed this was a separate fire of an intentional act?
We are all out to do a job to the best of our ability, however I have some real concerns here as to preservation of the alleged crime scene, because in my opinion, it strictly was not done.
Why was the bumper cover and the left front fender of the BMW analyzed? From the description, there were three flares by the driver’s front wheel. This needs to be thought about. The flare when lying on the floor should not radiate high enough to catch the bumper cover on fire. Even at that, the flares were supposedly by the front wheel. We have no way of knowing if they were there at the time of the fire.
As a fire fighter, I can say, the first job is to get the fire out and we are not looking at the time to preserve the evidence when doing an overhaul. The fire fighters could have kicked these flares. It was very smoky in there with the burning rubber from the snow blower tire which was completely consumed, which brings me to another point. There are only two instances I can think of in order for the snow blower tire to catch on fire while sitting on a concrete floor. One is a flare and I see no mention of one being found there. The other is gasoline, which could have ignited from the open flame in the burlap caused by an electrical malfunction. That’s it, the only two possibilities on the tire. As we know, fire characteristics are to burn upward and outward. The flaming tire on the snow blower had flames high enough to melt the plastic fuel tank and if partially filled with gas, the flames would climb up the paint on the north wall along the ceiling dropping flaming paint onto the car cover that was on the trunk of the Volvo. This car cover on the trunk would go up like a dry Christmas tree and possibly ignite whatever flammables were on the trunk and once there is an open flame, the flares can and do ignite.
The two biggest issues were that it was asked on cross examination of the police officer, why did he not secure the crime scene. They kept going back for evidence for months.
Secondly, why weren’t the issues of an accidental fire considered by both the police officer and the insurance investigator?
A portion of the drywall from the ceiling above the Volvo had been removed because of a theory a burning flare was placed in this location. Another burning flare was allegedly put to the wall. Then supposedly, burning flares were allegedly on the trunk of the Volvo and at the front bumper area of the BMW.
The evidence that supported one accidental fire was overwhelming, but overlooked.
Circuit breaker to garage kept tripping. Extension cord end melted into the floor, burn hole in the carpet was consistent with being on top of extension cord. Melted gas container was in close proximity of the flames coming out of the carpet. Floor angle consistent in which flaming gasoline would roll to snow blower tire and set it on fire.
The facts to an accidental fire were either missed or ignored.
During trial because of this animation and the cross from the defense attorney of the police officer, the case was settled for a misdemeanor for negligence of plugging in a space heater into an extension cord and the felony arson charges were dropped.