Acetone Case Study

In April 15, 2010 the Reed Richards Science Center in Akron burned to the ground. The Center had been conducting controversial cosmic ray experiments on rats and rabbits, and a number of animal rights groups had opposed the research. Preliminary investigations by the FBI’s Special Crimes Unit determined that there was a high level of Acetone found in the debris after the fire. Acetone is a highly flammable accelerant that can be used to help fires spread quickly through buildings. It is very rare and its distribution is tightly controlled by federal regulations.Special Agent Alicia Masters was in charge of the case. Her investigation quickly led to Storm. Storm was convicted of felony arson in 2001 after he used Acetone to burn down a chemical

During the meeting, Storm told Masters: “You have the wrong guy. I admit I would be happy to see this clinic and every one like it burned to the ground, but I wasn’t even in Akron that night; I was in Cincinnati at the Reds game.”Storm took the stand in his own defense, and testified that he was innocent, and that he was in Cleveland at a dance club at the time of the fire. On cross-examination, the prosecutor asked him whether he told the FBI that he had been at a Cincinnati Reds game on the night of the fire; Storm denied that he said this. Storm also called Ben Grimm to the stand. Ben Grimm is a scientist who worked at the Richards Center, and he testified that the day after the fire , he was talking to his colleague Susan, who also worked at the Center. During the conversation, Susan said to Grimm: “This is all my fault. I left the cosmic ray generator on last night by accident. It must have overheated and caused the

Special Agent Masters gave hearsay testimony about him being happy that burned to the ground. However, these Should have not been admissible under the Federal rule 801 through 807 state is not admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise the federal statute missile or other were prescribed by the Supreme Court. The statements that declared did not make while testifying in a current trial or hearing and a party off of evidence to provide the truth of the matter of rest and statements. Therefore, his statement to the special investigator about how happy was Chemical plant burn to the ground as inadmissible because it was done During interrogation Preceding And was not done in a quart. Therefore, the special agent cannot testify to what the Defended said at the time of interrogation only if the defendant 's admitted to Burning Down the facility can be used he did not admit to burning down this facility only has glad you 're that the facility was torched. The Federal rule 404 from other apps when offered to provide of other acts when offered to prove knowledge plan or some other relevant details. Is person prosecutor brought up the previous position of the defendant during the trial Which is prohibited under the federal rule 404. The Federal rule 407 excludes evidence of subsequent remedial measures when offered to