Warning: This episode contains details of violence against children. 

New science in the 1990s advanced the understanding of how fires work, but it took years for substantive change to follow. That had a huge impact on those already sitting in prison for arson convictions that were actually accidents.  David Gavitt and Anthony Kyles each spent over 20 years in prison, both convicted using now-outdated investigative methods for arson.

CSI On Trial is a co-production of iHeart Podcasts and School of Humans. It is a Curiosity Podcast based on the Curiosity Stream series CSI On Trial. You can watch all six episodes of the video series here if you sign up for Curiosity Stream.

Warning: This episode contains details of violence against children. 
New science in the 1990s advanced the understanding of how fires work, but it took years for substantive change to follow. That had a huge impact on those already sitting in prison for arson convictions that were actually accidents.  David Gavitt and Anthony Kyles each spent over 20 years in prison, both convicted using now-outdated investigative methods for arson.
CSI On Trial is a co-production of iHeart Podcasts and School of Humans. It is a Curiosity Podcast based on the Curiosity Stream series CSI On Trial. You can watch all six episodes of the video series<a href="https://curiositystream.com"> here</a> if you sign up for Curiosity Stream.

It is nearly impossible to imagine a criminal investigation that does not involve some kind of forensic science: firearms analysis, bloodstain patterns, arson, etc. But what leads us to trust these methods? Some point to the “CSI effect.” Viewers who have been watching true crime shows and trials for years have been trained to assume these methods lead to the right people getting arrested and convicted of some of the most heinous crimes. But what’s the science behind them? Are they valid?

In this podcast, host Molly Hermann lays out the lack of science behind some of the most well-known CSI tools, and tells the stories of the wrongfully convicted who went to prison for years. She interviews nearly 70 people - including forensic scientists, legal experts, and the exonerated - and digs into the larger issues within the criminal justice system that have let the “junk science” in.

It is nearly impossible to imagine a criminal investigation that does not involve some kind of forensic science: firearms analysis, bloodstain patterns, arson, etc. But what leads us to trust these methods? Some point to the “CSI effect.” Viewers who have been watching true crime shows and trials for years have been trained to assume these methods lead to the right people getting arrested and convicted of some of the most heinous crimes. But what’s the science behind them? Are they valid?
In this podcast, host Molly Hermann lays out the lack of science behind some of the most well-known CSI tools, and tells the stories of the wrongfully convicted who went to prison for years. She interviews nearly 70 people - including forensic scientists, legal experts, and the exonerated - and digs into the larger issues within the criminal justice system that have let the “junk science” in.

CSI On Trial

CSI On Trial: Ep 7 - Arson Investigations

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/e73c998e-6e60-432f-8610-ae210140c5b1/clips/f4d7d6ab-129f-4a7c-bdb3-afe000f4f376/transcript

Advertisement