Incendiary, accelerant or arson detection dogs are relatively new compared to the other jobs for law enforcement canines. On May 1, 1986 training began on the world's first Accelerant Detection Canine. A black Labrador retriever, named Mattie, was obtained from the Guide Dog Foundation and Trained by the Connecticut State Police (CSP) to react to the odor of incendiary liquids. The project program lasted for one year and surpassed all expectations of the project. This project was the combined efforts and cooperation of three agencies; The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF), Connecticut State Police, and the New Haven State's Attorney's Office.
At Falco K9 Academy we have found the same success with all of our detection dogs, including our Incendiary Detection Dogs. The training however is a bit more involved and time consuming…but just as rewarding. Because the dog needs to locate the odors both pre-burn and post burn this doubles the work as compared to the other disciplines (narcotics, explosives, etc). Also, unlike the other detection dogs we train the dogs to search humans and their clothing.
In the picture to the right we are showing Abby, a 2-year-old Pudlepointer (visit http://www.pudelpointer.com for more info) who has been trained to detect the primary odors for arson detection. In these photos she is searching and locating Mineral Spirits that has been placed on one of these 2x4’s. It is about a week old and been doused with water. The sit position is her alert that indicates she located the odor and location. With the command of “show me” she will put her nose back on the spot where she located the odor. Once Abby alerts during training we reward her with a toy.
We have decided to call our dogs incendiary detection dogs because most people like to use acronyms for K9’s and their jobs. For instance, PSD=Police Service Dog; EDD=Explosive Detection Dog; etc. Well we felt that IDD was better than ADD (Accelerant or Arson Detection Dog) because we did not want people to think we were training dogs to help people find misspelled words…although I could use one of those.
USES OF THE IDD:
Fire Scene Searches: The utilization of a canine to search a fire scene reduces the amount of man hours expended by fire/arson investigators. Canine teams can survey large areas in half the time it takes an investigator to complete a search of the same area. This is primarily due to the mobility and the keen olfactory senses that the canine’s possesses.
Utilization of the canine to search for ignitable liquids reduces the number of samples that the evidence technician needs to collect. This is based on the fact that alerts given by properly trained and maintained canine teams yields a high probability that ignitable liquids are present.
Investigators no longer have to collect "pot shot" samples based on fire behavior and burn patterns. Canine searches of fire scenes are also identifying locations where a perpetrator (s) have poured ignitable liquids that have not ignited. In some cases investigators are overlooking these areas. Identification of these areas shows more intent on the part of the perpetrator when the case goes to trial.
Once samples have been collected from the fire scene, these samples can be rechecked by the canine team prior to sealing off the evidence container, to ensure that the evidence technician has collected the debris sample in a location that has a high probability of containing an ignitable liquid.
EQUIPMENT SEARCHES: In one of the most publicized trials of the century, i.e. State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, the importance of using clean, uncontaminated evidence collection utensils/tools to collect fire debris samples should be of utmost importance to the evidence technician. A number of reports have suggested that the Incendiary detection canine olfactory senses is 200 times more sensitive than that of a human nose. Some reports even suggest that the canine can detect quantities of ignitable liquids below the detection limits of the laboratory instrumentation. Based on these two issues, Incendiary detection canine teams are being utilized to search the evidence collection utensils/tools utilized by evidence technicians after decontamination of the collection utensils to ensure that there is no cross contamination of the samples during the collection process. Searches of the utensils/tools is also being conducted when the collection process is completed and the utensils/tools are prepared for storage.
VEHICLE SEARCHES: Both burned and unburned vehicles are being searched by Incendiary detection canine teams. However, in the search of the burned vehicle, one must understand that a vehicle contains many common forms of ignitable liquids that will solicit a positive reaction by the canine. It will be the task of the trained fire/arson investigator to make the determination, through sound investigative practices and procedures, that the ignitable liquids located by the canine were common or uncommon to the area they were located in. This determination will either prove or disprove that a crime has been committed.
Unburned vehicles of potential suspect (s) are being searched provided that all applicable search and seizure criteria has been met by the investigative team. Documented searches across the country have assisted investigators in gathering physical evidence from the suspect (s) vehicle containing ignitable liquids used in commission of arson and unlawful burning cases. These searches have assisted in a conviction of the suspect (s).
CROWD SEARCHES: As most trained fire/arson investigators are aware, some fire setters like to remain on the fire scene or even return to the fire scene to watch their handy work. The canines are very social animals and provide no threat to the public. Utilizing the canine to participate in a non-solicited/non-directed search of the crowd gathered to watch the fire suppression activities has assisted investigators in identifying suspect/s early in an investigation. Although a positive reaction to a person/s does not mean that this person/s set the fire, it does give the investigator a reasonable suspicion to question the individual in which the canine alerted to gather more data concerning why the canine indicated on this particular person/s.
Once a suspect/s have been identified, directed searches of the suspect/s can be performed utilizing the canine. This type of search can only be performed if all criteria of the forth amendment right has been met, i.e. consent, search warrant, or search incident to arrest. This search is performed by introducing a subjects/ suspected of having ignitable liquids on or about their person/s into a line of individuals that is known not to have ignitable liquids on or about their person/s. The canine is then allowed to search the entire line of individuals identifying the suspect/s, which have a high probability of having ignitable liquids on or about their person/s.
CLOTHING SEARCHES: Once investigators have identified a suspect/s, the canine is utilized to search the clothing of the suspect/s. Again this search can only be performed if all criteria of the forth amendment have been satisfied, i.e. consent, search warrant, or search incident to arrest. This search is performed in somewhat the same fashion as a photo lineup is completed. The suspect/s clothing is introduced among known clothing containing no ignitable liquids. The canine team searches the entire clothing lineup, identifying the exact spot on the clothing that contains ignitable liquids. This type of search was utilized in the Branch Davidian fire in 1993, which resulted in convictions.
AREA SEARCHES: Many fire setters leave physical evidence behind during the act of fire setting. This physical evidence may contain ignitable liquid residues. This evidence may be located in areas in which investigators pay little or no attention to, i.e. exterior curtilage, fields, woods, etc. By the utilization of the canine team to search these areas for this evidence, large areas outside of the fire scene can quickly be searched to locate this physical evidence left by the fire setter. This type of search again reduces manpower and saves time. Physical evidence that may not otherwise been located by the fire/arson investigator is located and used to corroborate the investigative teams findings of an incendiary fire.
MISUSES OF THE CANINE: As discussed earlier, utilization of an Incendiary detector canine results in a high probability of positive laboratory finding for the presence of ignitable liquids. Although the canine is 100% accurate during daily training many individuals perceive that this accuracy should also be consistent during blind searches at fire scenes, crowd searches, area searches, and clothing lineups. This is simply not true. The canine is not infallible. Conformation of the canine alert must occur. This is completed by collecting samples at the exact spot of the canine alert and submitting the samples to a qualified laboratory for analysis for the presence of ignitable liquids. Any alert given by the canine that is not confirmed by laboratory analysis should be considered an unconfirmed indication of the presence of an ignitable liquid for the purposes of origin and cause determination. Forensic scientists have not yet determined the exact triggering process which solicit a positive alert by the canine for the presence of ignitable liquids. Therefore, any testimony given by canine handlers as to the presence of ignitable liquids, based on the canine alert alone, without collation of samples, and the samples being confirmed by the qualified laboratory, should not be admitted into evidence at trial.
There are three recent cases in which evidence of an alert by an Incendiary detector canine have been allowed into evidence. Supreme Court of Iowa vs. Roy Laverne Buller No. 146/93-701 May 25, 1994 involved inconclusive laboratory results. Supreme Court of Delaware vs. David J. Reisch No. 426, 1992 June 4, 1993 involved no laboratory test completed on a sample that was collected. State of New Jersey vs. Acevedo, case no. A-1896-91T4 involved negative laboratory results on samples that were collected. In These cases, the handlers were allowed to give expert testimony as to their canines reactions at the fire scene for the presence of ignitable liquids. This testimony was only allowed after a sufficient foundation was laid by the prosecutor concerning the training, experience, reliability, and the past conformation rate of the canine.
The cases were not prosecuted solely on the fact that the canine alerted indicating the presence of ignitable liquids proving the fires to be incendiary. In these cases experienced fire/arson investigators testified what the fire was incendiary in nature and that burn patterns consistent with ignitable liquid pour patterns were present in the fire scenes. The testimony of the canine handlers only corroborated the fire/arson investigators opinion that the fires were incendiary by the use of ignitable liquids based on their canine’s reactions. No positive laboratory results were introduced to confirm the use of ignitable liquids.
It is the opinion of many handlers, trainers, forensic chemist and professional fire/arson investigators that testimony given by canine handlers that a particular fire is incendiary in nature based solely on positive reactions by their canine for the presence ignitable liquids by their canine partners, is a gross misuse of the Incendiary detector canine. Incendiary Detection Canines are only a tool to assist fire/arson investigators and evidence technicians in locating the exact spot in which to collect a fire debris sample that has a high probability of containing ignitable liquids. Samples should be collected and confirmed by laboratory analysis that ignitable liquids are present in the fire scene. This in itself still should not be the determining factor to prove that a fire was incendiary in nature. Testimony by a qualified fire/arson investigator should carry the greater weight of the case that the fire was incendiary in nature.
The use of Incendiary Detection Canines that have been trained on the methodology of unsound professional training techniques have increased throughout the United States. These methodologies of training have given rise to concern in that these canines are not being trained daily and validated yearly. Constant discrimination training must occur to endure that the canine is properly discriminating between pyrolysis products commonly found in fire scenes and ignitable liquids. These canines should also be trained at a level in which a qualified laboratory can consistently find ignitable liquids in suspect samples submitted. Canine handlers must maintain current daily training records for court purposes. Crime laboratories are encouraged to maintain strict records on canine alerts that are submitted for analysis for the purposes of proficiency rating of the canines.
These concerns have prompted the National Fire Protection Association to propose a Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA) to NFPA Guideline 921. This TIA addresses the proper use and misuses of the Incendiary detector canine.
Incendiary Detector Canines, properly trained and used, can be a very effective investigative tool for the fire/arson investigator. It is the responsibility of professionals in the field of fire/arson investigation and professional canine trainers/handlers to ensure this valuable tool is used properly to accomplish our arson mitigation goals in the United States.
