NCJ Number
61660
Journal
Fire and Arson Investigator Volume: 30 Issue: 1 Dated: (JULY-SEPTEMBER 1979) Pages: 33-41
Date Published
1979
Length
9 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE DEALS WITH CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE VERSUS DIRECT EVIDENCE AS IT APPLIES TO AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE OF FRAUD-ARSON UNDER INSURANCE CONTRACT PROVISIONS.
Abstract
DIRECT EVIDENCE PROVES ANY MATTER OF FACT IN DISPUTES AND IS SWORN TO BY PERSONS WHO HAVE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF IT BY THE SENSES. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PROVES A DISPUTED FACT BY PROOF OF OTHER FACTS. ALTHOUGH THE SAYING GOES THAT WITHOUT AN EYEWITNESS, AN ARSON DEFENSE CANNOT BE MADE, MOST ARSON CASES ARE WON OR LOST IN COURT ON THE BASIS OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. FRAUD-ARSON DEFENSE UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE INSURANCE CONTRACT REQUIRES THAT THE DEFENDANT'S INSURANCE COMPANY PROVE THE FIRE WAS INCENDIARY AND SET BY OR UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE INSURED, WITH IDENTIFICATION OF A MOTIVE. REASONS WHY AN INSURED MIGHT SET THE HOME OR PLACE OF BUSINESS ON FIRE INCLUDE DELINQUENT BANK LOANS, RENTAL OR MORTGAGE PAYMENTS, OR EQUIPMENT LOANS; A DETERIORATING BUILDING; GAMBLING DEBTS; AN IRS PROBLEM; AND THE BUILDING MAY BE ABOUT TO BE OR HAS BEEN CONDEMNED FOR URBAN RENEWAL OR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION. THESE MOTIVES ARE ALMOST ALWAYS SHOWN BY CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE (I.E., BOOKS AND RECORDS, LEGAL PAPERS, OR WITNESS STATEMENTS), AS ARE THE INCENDIARY NATURE OF THE FIRE (THE RESULT OF A CRIMINAL AGENCY), THE 'CORPUS DELICTI,' AND THE OPPORTUNITY OF THE INSURED. GENERALLY, A FAVORABLE VERDICT BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CAN BE OBTAINED THROUGH A PROFESSIONAL AND WELL-PLANNED INVESTIGATION WHICH PRESENTS STRONG EVIDENCE OF THESE FACTORS. COURT DECISIONS INVOLVING DAMAGE RECOVERY FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE NOTED. (DEP)