If you are dependent upon an embedded medical device, should the device that helps keep you alive also be allowed to incriminate you in a crime? After all, the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects a person from being forced to incriminate themselves.Nonetheless, that\u2019s what happened after a house fire in Middletown, Ohio.WCPO Cincinnati caught video of the actual fire, as well delivered news that the owner\u2019s cat died in the fire. As a pet owner, it would be hard to believe that a person would set a fire and leave their pet to die in that fire. The fire in question occurred back in September 2016; the fire department was just starting an investigation to determine the cause of the blaze.A month later, 59-year-old homeowner Ross Compton was arrested and charged with felony aggravated arson and insurance fraud. The cause of the fire was still undetermined, but it had resulted $400,000 in damages to the house and contents of the 2,000-square-foot home.Fire investigators knew there had been \u201cmultiple points of origin of the fire from the outside of the residence.\u201d At the time, the police cited inconsistencies in Compton\u2019s statements when compared with the evidence from the fire.There were additional \u201cconflicting statements\u201d given to the 911 operator; Compton had said \u201ceveryone\u201d was out of the house, yet the 911 operator also heard him tell someone to \u201cget out of here now.\u201d In the 911 call published by WLWT5, an out-of-breath Compton claimed he had \u201cgrabbed a bunch of stuff, threw it out the window.\u201d He claimed to have packed his suitcases, broken the glass out of bedroom window with his walking stick, and tossed the suitcases outside.Compton also told the dispatcher he had \u201can artificial heart.\u201dAfter this, things really get interesting because police investigators used data from Compton\u2019s electronic heart device against him. Isn\u2019t that self-incrimination? Can a person \u201cplead the Fifth\u201d when it comes to self-incriminating data collected from their medical device?Police set out to disprove Compton\u2019s story about the fire by obtaining a search warrant to collect data from Compton\u2019s pacemaker. WLWT5 reported that the cops wanted to know \u201cCompton\u2019s heart rate, pacer demand and cardiac rhythms before, during and after the fire.\u201dOn Friday, Jan. 27, the Journal-News reported that court documents stated: \u201cA cardiologist who reviewed that data determined \u2018it is highly improbable Mr. Compton would have been able to collect, pack and remove the number of items from the house, exit his bedroom window and carry numerous large and heavy items to the front of his residence during the short period of time he has indicated due to his medical conditions.'\u201d+ What do you think? Share your thoughts about the use of pacemaker data as evidence on our Facebook page. +Middletown Police said this was the first time it had used data from a heart device to make an arrest, but the pacemaker data proved to be an \u201cexcellent investigative tool;\u201d the data from the pacemaker didn\u2019t correspond with Compton\u2019s version of what happened. The retrieved data help to indict Compton.Lt. Jimmy Cunningham told WLWT5, \u201cIt was one of the key pieces of evidence that allowed us to charge him.\u201dIt\u2019s worth noting that gasoline was also found on various pieces of Compton\u2019s clothing. Could police have indicted him without using the data from his pacemaker against him?