General Problems Encountered With Prosecutors Accepting Arson Cases for Prosecution and Practical Solutions to Those Problems

• NCJ Number: 86105
• Author(s): P Barrett; A J Gross; L Killer; J A Pickering; R Tontarski; D L Berenz
• Editor(s): S Hart, T J Murphy, B Skaggs, H M Williams
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 13 pages
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Fire/Arson Investigation Research Paper, October 11-29, 1982

Annotation

This paper focuses on the reasons why prosecutors are reluctant to initiate court proceedings in arson cases and suggests strategies which will facilitate successful actions.

Abstract

Prosecutors do not initiate formal proceedings because several factors make arson cases difficult to win. The lack of eyewitnesses, sparsity of real evidence, and the complex and technical nature of the arson case present problems for the prosecutor. In addition, prosecutors often lack confidence in the fire investigator's expertise. The investigator should adopt several approaches to change this image and promote confidence. Conduct, appearance, timing, education, and preparedness are important aspects to consider. While arson is increasing at an alarming rate, the conviction rate remains less than 9 percent of those arrested for the crime. Improved investigation and preparation by investigating agencies and better preparation by the prosecuting attorney are the primary means of reversing this statistic. Once arson has been established, prosecution efforts center on implicating the defendant. Circumstantial evidence is often the key to successful implication. Friendly rapport between the investigator and prosecutor, as well as pretrial conferences, will ensure the most successful courtroom presentation possible from the facts of the case. Eight footnotes and a seven-entry bibliography are provided.