Accelerant Canines In Fire Investigation

Introduction Fire investigators have many different types of technology and equipment available to them today to assist in the investigation process. Accelerant canines are becoming a more commonly used piece of “equipment” used by fire investigators today. Accelerant canines have many uses in fire investigations and other investigations as well; they do require specific training in order to do this work however, also; there are some challenges faced with accelerant canine findings in the court of law. Great examples of these legal challenges that the fire investigator may face include the cases of Daubert and Benfield. Accelerant canines are a large component of the investigation process that can positively assist the fire investigator in …show more content…
This document will focus on the use of accelerant canines in fire investigation/searches. According to Jonas and Bueker (1999) one of the major uses of accelerant canines during fire investigations is their ability to cover and investigate large areas of fire scenes. The amount of hours spent by the fire investigator on the investigation scene can be decreased dramatically with the use of an accelerant canine (p. 2). This amount of available assistance to the fire investigator can help …show more content…
All of these examples are legal cases that emphasize the challenges produced by legal courtrooms in regards to accelerant canine evidence. In the case of Daubert versus Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals Icove, DeHaan, and Haynes (2013) discuss the right a judge has to exclude information based upon specific criteria presented in the court of law. The overall outlook of this case was to prove that judges need the determine if an experts evidence/information is reliable when used in the court of law (p. 19). The findings of this case relate to the importance of evidence collection, produced by accelerant canines that are presented in the court of law. In relevance to the use of accelerant canine evidence, and the Daubert Case, judges need to be able to decide if the evidence produced is applicable or not. For example, if the judge understands that an accelerant canine is trained to identify only non-pyrolysis, liquid accelerant, scents but the evidence presented by the handler deals with a scent identifying pyrolysis scents then the judge can identify this evidence as unreliable and irrelevant to the case. It is important to collect appropriate evidence with the use of an accelerant canine to avoid potential challenges faced in the legal