MYTH:"In a fully involved room, an experienced investigator can identify patterns produced by ignitable liquids on the basis of visual observation alone."
"Experts say that when a fire breaks out, a phenomenon called flashover can occur. Flashover is a transition point at which heat causes almost everything in a room to catch fire. When it happens, the natural patterns of the fire can be obscured or destroyed. V-shaped burn patterns, which often occur after a flashover, can be misinterpreted to indicate arson."
ABC News: 20/20; Reporter Thomas Berman;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: (Wikipedia); Cameron Todd Willingham (January 9, 1968 – February 17, 2004), born in Carter County, Oklahoma, was sentenced to death by the state of Texas for murdering his three daughters—two year old Amber Louise Kuykendall, and one year old twins Karmon Diane Willingham and Kameron Marie Willingham— by setting his house on fire. The fire occurred on December 23, 1991 in Corsicana, Texas. Lighter fluid was kept on the front porch of Willingham’s house as evidenced by a melted container found there. Some of this fluid may have entered the front doorway of the house carried along by fire hose water. It was alleged this fluid was deliberately poured to start the fire and that Willingham chose this entrance way so as to impede rescue attempts. The prosecution also used other arson theories that have since been brought into question. In addition to the arson evidence, a jailhouse informant claimed Willingham confessed that he set the fire to hide his wife's physical abuse of the girls, although the girls showed no other injuries besides those caused by the fire. Neighbors also testified that Willingham did not try hard enough to save his children. They allege he "crouched down" in his front yard and watched the house burn for a period of time without attempting to enter the home or go to neighbors for help or request they call firefighters. He claimed that he tried to go back into the house but it was "too hot". As firefighters arrived, however, he rushed towards the garage and pushed his car away from the burning building, requesting firefighters do the same rather than put out the fire. After the fire, Willingham showed no emotion at the death of his children and spent the next day sorting through the debris, laughing and playing music. He expressed anger after finding his dartboard burned in the fire. Firefighters and other witnesses found him suspicious of how he reacted during and after the fire. Willingham was charged with murder on January 8, 1992. During his trial in August 1992, he was offered a life term in exchange for a guilty plea, which he turned down insisting he was innocent. After his conviction, he and his wife divorced. She later stated that she believed that Willingham was guilty. Prosecutors alleged this was part of a pattern of behavior intended to rid himself of his children. Willingham had a history of committing crimes, including burglary, grand larceny and car theft. There was also an incident when he beat his pregnant wife over the stomach with a telephone to induce a miscarriage. When asked if he had a final statement, Willingham said: "Yeah. The only statement I want to make is that I am an innocent man - convicted of a crime I did not commit. I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do. From God's dust I came and to dust I will return - so the earth shall become my throne. I gotta go, road dog. I love you Gabby." However, his final words were directed at his ex-wife, Stacy Willingham. He turned to her and said "I hope you rot in hell, bitch" several times while attempting to extend his middle finger in an obscene gesture. His ex-wife did not show any reaction to this. He was executed by lethal injection on February 17, 2004. Subsequent to that date, persistent questions have been raised as to the accuracy of the forensic evidence used in the conviction, specifically, whether it can be proven that an accelerant (such as the lighter fluid mentioned above) was used to start the fatal fire. Fire investigator Gerald L. Hurst reviewed the case documents including the trial transcriptions and an hour-long videotape of the aftermath of the fire scene. Hurst said, "There's nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire. It was just a fire."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you survive a fatal fire, you've got a very good chance of being charged with setting it," John Lentini, one of the nation's leading fire experts, told "20/20," the story by reporter Thomas Berman begins, under the heading, "Top Five Arson Fire Myths: Fire Expert John Lentini Outlines Common Myths and Misunderstandings in Fire Behavior."
"If five percent of the nation's half-million building fires every year are suspicious, according to Lentini, that means there would be 25,000 chances to charge someone mistakenly with arson," the story continues.
""It's one of the few crimes where the state actually has to prove that a crime took place. And if they do that with bad evidence, and the jury believes that it's a set fire, many times there is no doubt about who did it," Lentini said.
"20/20" examines several cases in a report to air Friday where people claim someone was falsely charged, convicted or even executed based on bad fire science and puts those theories to the test.
"I can turn just about any fire into an arson fire if that's what I want to do," said Lentini.
Lentini, who has conducted over 2,000 fire scene inspections, outlines below what he considers the most-common arson myths in 2010.
Arson Myths
The Five Most Common Arson Myths in 2010
1. The lowest and deepest charring indicates the point of origin in a fully involved room.
2. In a fully involved room, an experienced investigator can identify patterns produced by ignitable liquids on the basis of visual observation alone.
Experts say that when a fire breaks out, a phenomenon called flashover can occur. Flashover is a transition point at which heat causes almost everything in a room to catch fire. When it happens, the natural patterns of the fire can be obscured or destroyed. V-shaped burn patterns, which often occur after a flashover, can be misinterpreted to indicate arson.
3. Flammable liquids burn at a higher temperature than ordinary combustibles.
It's a common misconception that gasoline burns at a higher temperature than wood. It's actually the amount of ventilation that determines the temperature of the fire, not the nature of the fuel.
4. Spalling or flaking of concrete, especially in a "puddle" shape, is an indicator of the presence of burning ignitable liquids.
Fire tests have shown that "puddle" shapes can occur after a flashover.
5. Heat rises and fire always burns upward. Floor level burning is therefore an indication of an incendiary fire.
The idea that a fire will not burn downward unless it has "help" is a simplistic explanation of fire behavior that doesn't take into account the flashover phenomenon. It was widely believed that burning on the floor, particularly under furniture, indicated an origin on the floor, and pointed toward arson.
Additional Myths Still in Favor in Some Quarters Today
6. Multiple low burns, or multiple V-shaped burn patterns, even if they are burned together, indicate multiple origins.
7. Using models, it is possible to calculate fire behavior precisely.
8. A narrow V-pattern indicates a rapidly burning fire, whereas a wide V-pattern indicates a "normal" fire.
9. Although flashover and full room involvement can generate ambiguous patterns, flashover is rare. (Flashover is a transition point at which you go from having a fire in a room to a room on fire).
10. A melted aluminum threshold is unusual in a "normal" fire, and tends to indicate the presence of ignitable liquids.
Myths That Have Been Largely Discredited, And Are Only Used By Those Profoundly Unaware Of The Science
1. "Crazed" glass, broken throughout, indicates that the glass was rapidly heated. Further, the size of the crazing can provide information about the origin.
2. The size and appearance of char blisters can provide information about what was burning, and how rapidly it was burning.
3. An unconfirmed canine alert constitutes valid evidence of an accelerant.
4. The temperature of a fire follows a "standard time-temperature curve."
5. The heat release rate of a fire can be predicted by knowing the weight of combustible fuels in a room."
The story can be found at:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/fire-arson-myths-misunderstandings/story?id=10540364
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;