Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
A Critical Analysis of the Amanda Alley Fire Investigation
By Alexis Holmgren
In the early morning hours of July 27, 1998, an apartment in Davie, Florida occupied by Amanda Alley and her two roommates caught fire. One of the roommates was awakened by a loud sound that resembled an explosion. When he came out of his room, he saw Amanda Alley "on fire", pushed her into the shower, and put out the flames with the water. The roommate escaped the apartment, but Amanda remained trapped inside where she died from smoke inhalation. Upon exiting the apartment, the roommate almost immediately ran into the building owner and the victim's married lover, Kazem "Kaz" Pourghafari who later became the prime suspect in the case. Following a seven week trial, a jury read the verdict of "not guilty" on April 22, 2004. So, was it murder?
The prosecution presented the theory that the suspect, Mr. Pourghafari ignited the fire deliberately by pouring gasoline around the victim's bedroom on her bed, the victim, and the floor and then igniting the fire with a lighter. They presented this case as a classic case of arson and murder. They presented the motive for the crime as the suspect having done this because of his affair with Amanda. She had thought she may have been pregnant and his wife had caught him with Amanda only a few days before the fire. The possibility of a divorce that could have hurt his business meant that he needed to "get rid of" Amanda.
The defense presented the theory that this was an accidental fire. The victim was known to store paper money in a light bridge above her bed. The light bridge was fitted with halogen lights, which are known for being good ignition sources. They believe the money in the light box caught fire, eventually burned so the light box fell down onto the bed, the bed caught on fire, and the fire spread from there. They said the gasoline detected was the result of contamination of the fire scene by the firefighters and their positive pressure ventilation fan (PPV fan).
Excavation of a fire scene is a technique used by investigators to determine the point of origin of a fire. Investigators remove debris and any other objects from the area of interest they have identified as the likely location of the point of origin. Debris are removed layer by layer, systematically. There are two main ways investigators perform excavations of fire scenes, using either the physical method or the mechanical method. In the physical method, investigators remove the debris by hand. In the mechanical method, investigators use machines to excavate the scene such as a mechanical excavator. Mechanical excavation is usually performed first, if it is used, to remove debris that is not critical to the investigation. Then, investigators would take a closer look at the scene by performing physical excavation themselves.
The fire scene in the Amanda Alley case was excavated in an effort to locate the point of origin and to find evidence to determine the cause of the fire. The scene was excavated following the rule of working from the area of least damage to the area of most damage using the physical method of excavation. In other words, it was done manually by investigators by removing and shoveling debris.
When physically excavating the scene around the victim’s bed, in a shovelful of debris investigators smelled a strong odour of gasoline. “It basically hit you in the face, this is gasoline.” Said Lt. Joe Schwartz. This prompted them to take samples and test them for the presence of accelerants from the victim’s bedroom. During their excavation, investigators uncovered splash patterns which were consistent with flammable liquid (gasoline) being poured around the victim’s bedroom. When sifting through debris, investigators discovered pieces of burned baby books which provided credibility to the prosecutor’s motive that Amanda was killed because she thought she may have been pregnant.
It is viewed as the proper way to investigate fire scenes to conduct the investigation by moving from the area of least damage to the area that has the greatest amount of damage. Every fire scene is processed through the initial analysis which involves locating the area of origin, finding the point of origin, determining the cause of the fire, and locating and collecting evidence. As with any other potential crime scene, photographs are taken of every piece of the fire scene at numerous views. Videos are also sometimes taken. Diagrams of the scene of the fire are created. All rooms are photographed and otherwise documented whether they have significant damage, minimal damage, or no damage at all.
During the initial analysis of the scene, investigators worked from the area of least damage to the area of most damage.
Electrical outlets, lighting, and other possible sources of an accidental fire were examined in an effort to determine the cause of the fire.
Photographs were taken of every area of the fire scene both before the excavation was performed and afterward.
By working from the area of least damage to the area of most damage, investigators determined the area of origin of the fire was Amanda Alley’s bedroom. It had the most fire damage by far.
Through the examination of electrical outlets, lighting, and other possible sources of an accidental fire, these were all eliminated as possible causes of the fire.
The photographs and records taken from the scene were able to be analyzed by experts.
Witnesses and suspects are interviewed by the police to establish alibis, document their eyewitness accounts of the scene of the crime, to question the suspect on their involvement, and to give police any more information these people may know about the crime. Witness and suspect interviews can also reveal the motive for the crime in question. During an interview, the investigator will ask questions, record the answers, and often take an official statement from the person being interviewed that they must sign.
Police brought the suspect, Kazem Pourghafari, in for questioning. The interview was conducted to see what information the suspect would provide investigators.
Police interviewed numerous witnesses known by Amanda Alley including; friends, acquaintances, co-workers and more. Interviews by a neighbor of the Alley residence and co-workers provided police with clues to motive.
During the interview, after the police brought up his affair with the victim, Mr. Pourghafari started minimizing the extent of the relationship he had with Amanda. It was during this time that investigators noticed the burn marks on the suspect’s hair and hands. When they questioned him about it, he made excuses for the burns and said he got them trying to use the hose to put out the fire after he arrived on the scene. The demeanour of the suspect completely changed. This lead investigators to make him their prime suspect and to collect his clothing for testing for accelerants.
A neighbor of Amanda interviewed by police told them that the suspect’s wife had caught him cheating with Amanda after coming home from a business trip on the Sunday before the fire. The suspect’s truck was parked in the back by Amanda’s apartment.
It is standard procedure that if an investigator has any suspicions that ignitable liquids were involved in the fire that samples be taken, preserved, and tested for the presence of these substances. The typical locations samples would be taken from include; locations the liquid may have been preserved such as under the threshold of a door, from the outside edge of an extremely fire damaged location, cracks in the floor or floorboards, and from locations the liquid may have been absorbed. These samples can also be taken from the victim’s body in cases of death fires and from the clothing of the suspect(s).
After smelling the presence of gasoline at the fire scene, investigators took samples from 3 locations at the Amanda Alley fire to test for the presence of gasoline. Samples were taken from; the top of the victim’s bed, the floor beneath the victim’s bed, and under the threshold of the bedroom door.
After the suspect’s clothing and shoes were collected, they were tested for the presence of accelerants.
The three samples taken from the victim’s bedroom were all positive for gasoline. This lead investigators to conclude based on the presence and amount of gasoline that the gasoline had been placed in the house before the fire. This lead them to conclude this was an arson fire and Amanda Alley’s death was an intentionally committed murder.
Testing on the suspect’s shoes for accelerants was positive for gasoline on his right shoe. This gave investigators enough evidence to arrest the suspect for arson and the murder of Amanda Alley.
In arson cases, the suspect's body is typically examined by the medical examiner for any evidence of burns. This includes; burns on the skin of the suspect, burns on the hair of their hands, burns to the eyelashes or eyebrows, burns to facial hair, and any burns to the hair on their head. Burns on the suspect are documented through photographs and additional notes. These can be used as evidence to make an arrest and evidence in court.
When the suspect, Mr. Pourghafari, was brought in for questioning, during his first interview with police, one of the detectives noticed singe marks on the back of the suspect’s hair and severe burns and blistering to his right hand. Photographs were taken of the burns on the suspect’s hands and hair.
From the burn marks and the way the suspect responded to being questioned about them, investigators determined that they needed to investigate Mr. Pourghafari further as a suspect.
Lt. Joe Schwartz analyzed photographs of the burns on the suspect’s hands and determined that the likely source of these burns was from using an object such as a lighter to light the gasoline on fire and start the arson. When he did this, the vapours of the gasoline caught fire, burning his hands and singeing his hair.
Gasoline weathering testing is a relatively new technique that is used to determine whether a sample of ignitable liquid was used to ignite a fire or was introduced after the fire through contamination. The analytical techniques of gas chromatography and mass spectrometry are used to test the chemical signature of the sample of ignitable liquid from the fire. If a very low level of weathering is present (less than 50%) the sample is determined to be the result of contamination.
The defense hired a private Fire Engineer to complete gasoline weathering testing on a sample from the fire scene to determine if the gasoline found at the fire scene was used to ignite the fire or was the result of contamination. Using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, the chemical signature of the gasoline found at the fire scene was analyzed. To try to reproduce the same chemical signature of the gasoline from the fire scene, an experiment was performed. Gasoline was poured on a carpet sample and left at room temperature for 30 minutes to simulate fire scene contamination. Gasoline was poured on a second carpet sample and set on fire in a burn cell, then extinguished with a water extinguisher to simulate gasoline being used to start an arson fire.
The samples from this experiment and the Amanda Alley fire were sent to a third party lab to be analyzed. The results showed that the gasoline left out in room temperature for thirty minutes that was not exposed to any fire matched the sample from the Amanda Alley fire. Therefore, the Fire Engineer concluded that the gasoline at the fire scene was the result of contamination and was not used as an accelerant.
The Fire Dynamics Simulator is a computer program used by investigators to reproduce the conditions that may have occurred during an actual fire incident. Numerous parameters must be entered into the simulator including; the layout and dimensions of the building, the ignition source (its location and energy release), the thermal properties of the walls, ceilings and floors, and any openings (the size, location, and timing). The simulator then produces a three dimensional model of the potential conditions during the actual fire.
A privately hired Fire Protection Engineer for the defense used the Fire Dynamics Simulator to simulate the fire in Amanda Alley’s apartment. He specifically tested the defense theory that the fire was ignited accidentally by the light box above the victim’s bed. All known data about the fire was entered into the simulator including; the building geometry, details of the walls and ceiling, details about the position of doors and windows (the bathroom door was open and the window was open), details about the light box and the bed, and details of the fire itself.
The Fire Dynamics Simulator also should have been used to test the arson theory.
The simulation of the fire that was created begins with the light box falling and igniting the bed, the fire then spreads from the bed and becomes bigger in size. It was concluded that the results of the Fire Dynamics Simulator data fit the accidental fire theory. “It is our conclusion that the accidental scenario fit all of the data of the Alley fire.” Said Fire Protection Engineer Doug Carpenter.
By testing the arson theory, it could have been determined whether the data from the fire also fit the arson scenario. If it was determined during this testing that the data did not fit an arson at all, this would have provided more evidence for the defense and Mr. Pourghafari's innocence. If the data also fit an arson scenario, the prosecution could have used this at trial as greater evidence of the suspect’s guilt in having set the fire intentionally.
Fire experts are sometimes called in by the defense, law enforcement, investigators, or the prosecution to conduct an analysis of the investigation and to determine its validity. These experts review photographs of the fire scene, reports, sometimes testimony, and other fire scene data. They then evaluate the validity of the work of the other investigators and draw their own conclusions. They may then give expert testimony on the results of their own analysis.
Two separate analyses were performed by experts.
A Fire Analyst and Forensic Chemist called in by the defense analyzed the crime scene photos. He is a renowned expert and has been to the scene of more than 2000 fires. He started his analysis by looking at the photos for evidence of a flashover. A flashover occurs when the fire in a room suddenly ignites the majority of its contents, transitioning from a fire to an entire room on fire. He also analyzed the photos and records to determine any other plausible ignition sources that could have started the fire.
One of the most respected names in fire investigation was brought in as an expert for the prosecution. The prosecutor wanted him to take another look at the case as an impartial source to determine what caused the fire. He started by looking at the facts of the case from the initial incident report. Then he analyzed the fire scene photos.
The defense’s fire expert determined that a flashover had indeed occurred. He made this conclusion based on the presence of charring all the way around the door moulding and on the floor level. He also concluded that because a flashover had occurred, it was not possible to make conclusions based on the visual fire damage including the analysis of burn patterns. This is because flashovers themselves burn the floors and create irregular burn patterns. Based on his analysis of photos and records from the case, he determined that the fire likely started in the light box above the victim’s bed. He learned that the victim used the light box to store money. So, he concluded that the likely explanation was that the halogen lights caught the money on fire, and the light box eventually fell down onto the bed and caught the bed on fire.
The prosecution’s fire expert determined that there was no indication that the fire started in any electrical fitting or light above the headboard. Therefore, the headboard and the lights above the headboard were eliminated as possible sources of ignition that could have caused this fire. He based this on his observation that the headboard was
burned uniformly except for where debris had fallen on
it from the ceiling and the overall lack of
damage to the headboard.
This testing has been performed in a few studies to determine whether the use of PPV fans results in the contamination of a fire scene with gasoline traces. Typically, carbon strips that absorb gasoline vapours are placed at varying distances from a PPV fan. The fan is then operated for a specific period of time. The strips are then collected and analyzed by a lab for the presence of gasoline.
A Forensic Fire Analyst from the Fire Marshal's Office conducted this testing. The PPV fan was set up in the standard position (around 6 feet from the doorway). Three sets of carbon strips were set up at the base of the fan, in the doorway, and inside the test structure. The PPV was then allowed to run.
The carbon strips were collected from the test site and analyzed in the lab. There were no samples that came up positive for gasoline. This enabled investigators to determine that since the PPV did not contaminate the fire scene in this experiment, there was no evidence that it contaminated the Alley fire scene either.
Visual analysis of burn patterns by fire investigators is an internationally recognized fire investigation technique that is central to many fire investigations. In general, V patterns can “point” to the point of origin of a fire. U shaped patterns can point to there having been a pool of origin such as a puddle of gasoline rather than a single point of origin. Inverted V patterns (also called inverted cones) can indicate the use of an accelerant. Char patterns on the floor can also indicate the use of an accelerant.
As a part of his analysis of crime scene photos and records, the prosecution’s fire expert analyzed the burn patterns found at the fire scene. Despite the defense’s expert asserting that burn patterns are unreliable after a flashover, he says that although it is difficult to analyze them it is possible.
Burn pattern analysis was also performed initially by the Fire Marshal.
The prosecution’s fire expert concluded that although the burn patterns on the edge of the bed and on the carpet adjacent to the bed were hidden, they were consistent with open flame promoted by gasoline. In other words, he determined that this fire was set intentionally as an arson fire with gasoline used as an accelerant.
During the initial analysis of the fire scene by the Fire Marshal, he determined that burn patterns on the floor of the victim’s bedroom were consistent with splash patterns from an accelerant having been poured around
the room.
When it is believed there is evidence on the clothing and shoes of a suspect, investigators will collect that clothing and those shoes as evidence. The clothing and shoes can be testing for fire remains and under a microscope to determine whether the clothing and shoes were subjected to high temperatures (i.e. a fire). If ignitable liquid is suspected in the fire, the clothing and shoes of the suspect can be tested for these substances.
Mr. Pourghafari’s clothing and shoes were collected by investigators because it was suspected there could be evidence of accelerants on the items. At this stage, Mr. Pourghafari was the prime suspect in the fire and the presence of gasoline at the fire scene had already been established. The clothing and shoes were sent off and tested for the presence of accelerants.
The testing for accelerants performed on the clothing and shoes cakes back positive for the presence of gasoline on the right shoe. This gave investigators enough evidence that Mr. Pourghafari had committed the arson that he was arrested for the crime.
The ATF is the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and explosives. The ATF laboratory is one of the largest and most well-known fire investigation labs in the United States. ATF agents use recreations to determine how fires burned. Their lab is equipped with multiple “burn cells” in which the features of a scene can be recreated and then set on fire to recreate the conditions of the actual scene of the fire. Complete rooms and even whole houses can be rebuilt, down to the small details such as the type of mattress. During the recreation, ATF agents use their massive calorimeter and thermal imaging cameras. The calorimeter enables investigators to measure
the mass of smoke and other materials released from the
fire to determine the size of a fire. Thermal imaging
cameras enable investigators to see the hottest
spots of a fire through all of the smoke
and debris
ATF agents could have rebuilt Amanda Alley's bedroom in two of their large burn cells. They then could have tested both of the accidental and arson methods of ignition and compared their results to the known facts of the actual fire.
By comparing the data from their recreations to the actual data from the Amanda Alley fire, investigators could have had more definitive, reliable data as to whether the actual fire was an accident or an arson. This could have been determined based on which recreation fire (accidental or arson) fit the data from the actual fire scene.
Education required:
Other possible requirements:
investigation into the cause of the Amanda Alley fire
Requirements:
Florida Davie Police Department
Education required:
Criminal Charges:
According to the Canadian Criminal Code, the sentences for arson are as explained below;
Mr. Pourghafari would have been charged under Section 433 of the Criminal Code in Canada. He knew that Amanda was in the house when he started the fire and, regardless of that, she died in the fire so was severely harmed. The charge would have been Arson- disregard for human life. This section states “433 Every person who intentionally or recklessly causes damage by fire or explosion to property, whether or not that person owns the property, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life where
(a) the person knows that or is reckless with respect to whether the property is inhabited or occupied; or
(b) the fire or explosion causes bodily harm to another person.”
Due to Amanda Alley dying in the fire, Mr. Pourghafari would have also been charged with first degree murder. Under Section 231 of the Criminal Code, first degree murder is defined as “Classification of murder
231 (1) Murder is first degree murder or second degree murder.
Planned and deliberate murder
(2) Murder is first degree murder when it is planned and deliberate.”
Investigators presented that Mr. Pourghafari intentionally brought gasoline to the house, poured it around Amanda’s bedroom and on her, and set the fire. This is an intentional and deliberate action that caused death. Therefore, he would have been charged with first degree murder.
If found guilty, the sentence for arson- disregard to human life is life in prison. Section 433 of the Criminal Code states this; “433 Every person who intentionally or recklessly causes damage by fire or explosion to property, whether or not that person owns the property, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life”
Section 235 of the Criminal Code states that the punishment for murder is life in prison.
“Punishment for murder
235 (1) Every one who commits first degree murder or second degree murder is guilty of an indictable offence and shall be sentenced to imprisonment for life.”
This case took place in Florida. Unlike Canada which is governed by the national laws laid out in the Criminal Code, states have their own unique criminal laws and statutes. Florida’s statute that governs crimes is titled Title XLVI- Crimes. Chapter 782 defines first-degree murder as “782.04 Murder.—
(1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being:
1. When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;
2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:
a. Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
b. Arson, ...
is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082.”
Mr. Pourghafari was charged with first-degree murder for the death of Amanda Alley.
Mr. Pourghafari was also charged with first-degree arson which is defined in Chapter 806 as;
“806.01 Arson.—
(1) Any person who willfully and unlawfully, or while in the commission of any felony, by fire or explosion, damages or causes to be damaged:
(a) Any dwelling, whether occupied or not, or its contents;
(b) Any structure, or contents thereof, where persons are normally present, such as: jails, prisons, or detention centers; hospitals, nursing homes, or other health care facilities; department stores, office buildings, business establishments, churches, or educational institutions during normal hours of occupancy; or other similar structures; or
(c) Any other structure that he or she knew or had reasonable grounds to believe was occupied by a human being,
is guilty of arson in the first degree, which constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.”
First-degree arson is a first degree felony in Florida. The possible sentence is up to 30 years in prison, up to 30 years probation, and a $10,000 fine. The minimum sentence is 21 months in prison.
The possible sentences for first degree murder in Florida are the death penalty and life in prison. Chapter 782 of Florida’s Title XLVI- Crimes describes the sentencing as follows;
“(b) In all cases under this section, the procedure set forth in s. 921.141 shall be followed in order to determine sentence of death or life imprisonment. If the prosecutor intends to seek the death penalty, the prosecutor must give notice to the defendant and file the notice with the court within 45 days after arraignment. The notice must contain a list of the aggravating factors the state intends to prove and has reason to believe it can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The court may allow the prosecutor to amend the notice upon a showing of good cause.”
In Mr. Pourghafari's case, prosecutors did not seek the death penalty.
Mr. Pourghafari was charged with first-degree murder and first degree arson. Prosecutors did not seek the death penalty on the first degree murder charge. He was found not guilty by a jury and acquitted after around 3 hours of deliberations following a seven week trial.
Fire Classification & My Decision
The four officially recognized causes of fires are; natural, accidental, incendiary, and undetermined.
Fires can also be classified based on their fuel source. In this classification system, fires are assigned a letter that describes their type of fuel source.
Based upon all of the previous information, I would classify this fire as an incendiary Class B fire. The presence of gasoline was detected in three unique locations in the victim’s bedroom (the top of the victim’s bed, the floor beneath the bed, and under the threshold of the bedroom door), indicating the presence of a large amount of gasoline over a significant area. The testing done by Forensic Fire Analyst Perry Michael Koussiafes with the PPV fan demonstrated no evidence that the PPV fan was capable of contaminating a fire scene. All of his samples were negative for the presence of gasoline. Electrical outlets and lighting were eliminated as possible ignition sources by both the Fire Marshal initially on the scene, Joe Schwartz, and one of the most respected names in the field of fire investigation, Forensic Fire Investigator John DeHaan. The Fire Marshal, Joe Schwartz also located burn splash patterns on the floor of the victim’s bedroom which were consistent with flammable liquid being poured throughout the room.
John DeHann also analyzed the crime scene records and photos and determined that the fire was set deliberately. He examined the burning of the headboard and determined that due to the lack of damage and the uniform burning of the headboard, the fire did not start in any electrical fitting or light in or above the headboard. He also performed burn pattern analysis which enabled him to conclude this fire was an arson. Despite the defense’s Fire Analyst, John Lentini, saying it is unreliable, DeHann says it is more difficult but still possible. He analyzed the burn patterns on the edge of the bed and on the carpet adjacent to the bed and concluded that they were consistent with an open flame promoted by gasoline. So, he concluded that the fire was set intentionally as an arson fire started with gasoline.
The experiment conducted by the defense’s Fire Engineer Jamie McAllister, which in my opinion was the most compelling piece of evidence for the defense, is not a widely accepted fire investigation technique and was largely discredited by a research study she completed a few years after this case, in 2006. The study says that “Analytical techniques, such as gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), can identify the presence of an ignitable liquid residue (ILR) in fire scene debris. However, this technique is not currently used to determine whether the presence of an ILR indicates that an ignitable liquid was used to initiate a fire or was the result of contamination of a fire scene. Currently, there is only one other study that would support a chemical analyst in making such a determination.”. In a direct quote from the study, it was concluded that “The overall analysis of the gasoline samples shows conflicting results. Based on the ATF laboratory analysis, no clear distinction was observed between the ambient and oven samples when compared to the samples exposed to either the small- or large-scale compartment fires. This finding is in stark contrast to the previous gasoline weathering study, where a clear difference was found between samples that were subjected to a fire and those that were not. In light of the significant differences in the percent of weathering determination between the ATF and ATS laboratories, it is clear that further comparison research is necessary before this technique can be broadly applied.”.
Samples sent to the ATF laboratory, arguably the most respected laboratory for fire investigation in the United States, and possibly worldwide could not tell the difference between samples that had gone through a fire and those that had not “... the analysis procedures used by the ATF laboratory for this test program could not distinguish whether the samples went through the fire or were the result of post-fire scene contamination. In contrast, the ATS laboratory procedures used for both this test program and the previous study are generally capable of distinguishing between a sample that went through the fire and a sample introduced after the fire.”. The ATS laboratory could only “generally” distinguish samples that had been through fires and those that had not meaning there is still a significant margin of error with this technique being applied in the ATS laboratory. It is not known what laboratory she used to complete the testing for the Amanda Alley fire investigation. Based upon this study, the testing she conducted for the Amanda Alley investigation is not reliable. Those results can not be used to definitively say whether the gasoline found at the fire scene was the result of contamination or used as an accelerant, despite the way it was presented in the programme “Forensics: You Decide”.
Therefore, this fire was started intentionally and deliberately in a human act by a person who knew a fire should not be started there. This classifies the fire as incendiary. The fire was started by a person pouring gasoline around the victim’s bedroom and then igniting it. This classifies the fire as Class B in regards to its fuel source since gasoline is a flammable liquid. This is a case of murder and arson committed by the suspect, Mr. Pourghafari. He set this fire due to the fear of a potential divorce hurting his business since his wife had already caught him with Amanda and her possibly wanting more commitment from him since she thought she may have been pregnant.
“Trial of Davie, Florida Man Starts In Lover’s Fiery Murder”. Firehouse. Copyright March 24, 2004. Retrieved from https://www.firehouse.com/home/news/10521618/trial-of-davie-florida-man-starts-in-lovers-fiery-murder
Burstein, Jon. “Acquitted Man, Jurors Celebrate”. SunSentinel. Copyright April 23, 2004. Retrieved from http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2004-04-23/news/0404221444_1_jurors-blaze-smoke-inhalation
Stratton, Jeff. “Trial by Fire”. New Times Broward Palm Beach. Copyright January 18, 2007. Retrieved from https://www.browardpalmbeach.com/news/trial-by-fire-6309241
Shepard, Kenton., Gromicko, Nick. “Fire Extinguisher Maintenance and Inspection”. International Association of Certified Home Inspectors. Retrieved from https://www.nachi.org/fire-extinguisher-maintenance-inspection.htm
“Types of Fires”. Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association. Retrieved from http://www.femalifesafety.org/types-of-fires.html
“Find Your Fire Science Degree”. Fire Science Online. Retrieved from https://www.firescience.org/
“How To Become A Fire Marshal. Fire Science Degree. Retrieved from http://www.firesciencedegree.com/how-to/become-a-fire-marshal/
“What exactly does a Fire Marshal do? More than you think.”. City and Borough of Juneau. Copyright January 22, 2018. Retrieved from https://beta.juneau.org/department/manager/managers-blog/juneaus-fire-marshal-does-more-than-you-think/01/22/2018
“Police Detective”. America’s Job Exchange. Retrieved from https://www.americasjobexchange.com/police-detective-job-description
“Meeting the Requirements to Serve as a Detective in Criminal Investigations”. DetectiveEDU. Retrieved from https://www.detectiveedu.org/requirements/
“Becoming a Detective”. Legal Career Path. Copyright 2018. Retrieved from http://legalcareerpath.com/detective/
McAllister, Jamie L., Roby, Richard J., Carpenter, Douglas J., Torero, Jose L. The Extent of Evaporation of Ignitable Liquids Under Exposure to Compartment Fires, Non-Fire Thermal and Non-Thermal Environments. Combustion Science & Engineering, Inc., USA, University of Edinburgh, UK. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289656330_The_extent_of_evaporation_of_ignitable_liquids_under_exposure_to_compartment_fires_non-fire_thermal_and_non-thermal_environments
Lang, T & Dixon, B.M.. (2000). The Possible Contamination of Fire Scenes by the use of Positive Pressure Ventilation Fans. Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal. 33. 55-60. 10.1080/00085030.2000.10757503. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271819097_The_Possible_Contamination_of_Fire_Scenes_by_the_use_of_Positive_Pressure_Ventilation_Fans
“How To Become A Fire Protection Engineer.” Fire Science Degree. Retrieved from http://www.firesciencedegree.com/how-to/become-a-fire-protection-engineer/
“How to Become a Fire Investigator”. Forensics Colleges. Sechel Ventures. Retrieved from https://www.forensicscolleges.com/blog/htb/how-to-become-a-fire-investigator
Redsteer, Andrine. “How to Become an Assistant District Attorney”. Career Trend. Updated July 5, 2017. Retrieved from https://careertrend.com/become-assistant-district-attorney-10489.html
“Defense Attorney: Duties, Outlook, and Requirements”. Study.com. Copyright 2003-2018. Retrieved from https://study.com/articles/Defense_Attorney_Duties_Outlook_and_Requirements.html
Koussiafes, Perry Michael. Evaluation of Fire Scene Contamination by Using Positive-Pressure Ventilation Fans. Forensic Science Communications. October 2004- Volume 4- Number 4. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved from https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/oct2002/koussiafes.htm
Lentini, John J. “Capabilities”. Scientific Fire Analysis. Copyright 2018. Retrieved from http://www.firescientist.com/resume.php
“How to Become an Arson Investigator”. Fire Science Online. Retrieved from https://www.firescience.org/how-to-become-an-arson-investigator/
“Certified Fire Investigator (IAAI-CFI)”. International Association of Arson Investigators. Copyright 2018. Retrieved from https://www.firearson.com/Training-Credentials/Certifications-Designations/Certified-Fire-Investigator-IAAICFI/Default.aspx
Criminal Code (Revised Statutes of Canada., 1985, c. C-46). Section 231. Government of Canada. Retrieved from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-231.html
Criminal Code (Revised Statutes of Canada., 1985, c. C-46). Section 433. Government of Canada. Retrieved from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-433.html
The 2018 Florida Statutes. Title XLVI- Crimes. Chapter 782 Homicide. Section 782.04. Online Sunshine, the Florida Legislature. Copyright 1995-2018. Retrieved from http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html
The 2018 Florida Statutes. Title XLVI- Crimes. Chapter 806 Arson and Criminal Mischief. Section 806.01. Online Sunshine, the Florida Legislature. Copyright 1995-2018. Retrieved from http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0806/Sections/0806.01.html
Best Practice Manual for the Investigation of Fire Scenes. ENFSI-BPM-FEI-01. Version 02. European Network of Forensic Science Institutes. Copyright June 2017. Retrieved from http://enfsi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ENFSI-BPM-FEI-001-002.pdf