DETROIT – A defense expert testified Thursday that the 2008 Detroit fire that killed firefighter Walter Harris may not have been arson, challenging the investigation that led to Mario Willis’ conviction.
Marc Fennell, a fire investigation expert called by Willis’ defense team, testified that the original fire investigation was flawed and that the cause should have been classified as “undetermined” rather than arson.
“Do it right. Do it the right way, and follow the science, follow the data and where that leads you should come up to a conclusion of the fire’s origin and hopefully a cause,” Fennell said during the hearing.
Key Challenges to Original Investigation
The defense expert specifically challenged two main aspects of the original investigation:
- The assumption that the house was vacant
- The reported smell of gasoline at the scene
Fennell offered alternative explanations for the presence of gasoline at the scene, suggesting it could have come from gas-powered chainsaws used by firefighters during the rescue operation. He noted that firefighters used these tools to reach firefighter Harris after the roof collapsed.
Criticism of Original Investigation
Fennell criticized the methodology of original fire investigator Rance Dixon, stating that Dixon:
- Failed to follow National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) guidelines
- Did not conduct a proper technical review
- Failed to follow basic steps of the scientific method
“If you have the wrong origin, you won’t have the right cause,” Fennell said.
--> Click here for all of our coverage on this case.
Significance of New Testimony
The testimony is particularly significant because Willis’ original defense team never called their own expert witness during his trial. This left the jury to consider only the prosecution’s theory of the case.
Defense attorney Wolfgang Mueller questioned Fennell about the impact this could have had on the original trial.
“You would’ve been able to show the jury that the only reasonable conclusion is that this fire was undetermined,” Mueller asked.
“Yes,” Fennell responded.
The prosecution maintains its position and questioned Fennell’s expertise during cross-examination, noting that he didn’t have access to all the evidence available to the original investigator including photographs.
What’s Next
The hearing is scheduled to resume on Jan. 7. After that, the judge will need to determine whether this new evidence warrants a new trial for Willis.
The case has already gone through multiple appeals, making the path forward uncertain. However, the defense team argues that this new expert testimony provides crucial scientific evidence that could challenge the original conviction.
Background
Mario Willis was convicted in connection with the 2008 fire that claimed the life of Detroit firefighter Walter Harris. The original investigation concluded the fire was intentionally set, leading to Willis’ conviction for his alleged role in arranging the arson.
Willis’ mother said the hearing is about getting the truth— not just for her family but for the City of Detroit.