Anyone can see that something unusual is present in Image 60 and to the trained and experienced eye a directional fragmentation charge is clearly apparent. This is an example of both regularity and colour change. This sign would be extremely unlikely to be misinterpreted and can be considered conclusive.
4.3.2. INCONCLUSIVE This is a sign that may or may not be IED related but is considered worth recording for further investigation. This category of sign may be used as indirect evidence in the MA land release process.
Image 61. Is there an inconclusive sign present?
Although Image 61 shows flattening in a position where an IED main charge and / or switch may be, or has been located, there are other reasons this sign could exist. This sign could be misinterpreted and should therefore be regarded as inconclusive. It is important that MA staff are able to identify when a sign is inconclusive and also be able to cross reference it to other associated signs and indicators. This ability to link signs and indicators together will help increase the confidence in decisions related to whether or not IED contamination is present. It is important that confidence in inconclusive evidence is graded to enable MA staff to better discount a ‘false sign’. How MA staff differentiate between conclusive and inconclusive signs will vary between different IED threats, environments and levels of staff experience related to the application of signs as a source of evidence. For example, during the early stages of an MA response, organisations may require several signs to be recorded and linked together before assigning them as conclusive evidence of IED contamination. As MA organisations and staff develop a greater level of experience, the use of signs will become a more effective tool.
ׁ HINT. Inconclusive signs combined with terrain-based indicators such as channelling may increase the level of confidence that IED contamination is present.
IED signs
471
Powered by FlippingBook