Prosecutors in the entire globe have often stumbled upon challenges in their attempts to prove arson cases. This issue is buttressed by United States Fire Administration (1988) in stating that “a National Institute of Justice study of four cities found that suspects were identified in less than one-third of the cases studied and in only four percent was any adult convicted of a crime.” The reasons behind this belief among legal experts are not particularly had to discern. First, statistics directly related to investigations and prosecutions of arson cases reveal that very few of these cases have been successful in the entire history of court cases.
Second, the acceptances for prosecution of arson cases are very low given the fact that many prosecutors believe that these cases are heavily circumstantial. United States Fire Administration (1988) reinforces this reluctance on the part of prosecutors to pursue arson cases by stating that “Many arson cases do rely on circumstantial evidence and involve technical issues of fire behavior.” The capacity in coming up with viable evidence in these cases therefore rests on the disapproval of other possible explanations. This is one of the greatest challenges for prosecutors.
Most cases in court base their validity for prosecution based on eye witness testimonies. The challenge with this type of crime is that in most cases, witnesses are hard to come over and testify and in cases where there are witnesses, their motives are not easy to substantiate. According to United States Fire Administration (1988), “eyewitnesses to arson are rare and arson motives are often difficult to identify and substantiate.” In addition to the above, prosecutors have also found challenges in establishing the motive of the fire. This relates to the difficulty in proving the motive of the crime. Last, it has been established that most of the arson cases are carried out in vacant buildings where there are no witnesses and any relevant information that can be of importance to prosecutors. One of the crimes where you have to disapprove something is marital rape.