Comments on: Boy blamed in blaze http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/ A forum for discussion of news that arises at the intersection of Christianity and culture. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:41:03 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Serious George http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233700 Serious George Fri, 02 Nov 2007 04:52:03 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233700 I'm just glad the minor brushfire I set off as a junior George (but seriously serious that bundles of matches were bundles of fun at the time) was in the relatively damp dales of western PA. But for the gracious gloom of Allegheny glens go I, SG I’m just glad the minor brushfire I set off as a junior George (but seriously serious that bundles of matches were bundles of fun at the time) was in the relatively damp dales of western PA.

But for the gracious gloom of Allegheny glens go I,

SG

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Random Name http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233694 Random Name Fri, 02 Nov 2007 04:09:18 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233694 14. Victoria <i>Frank I agree, I don’t think anyone has enough information.</i> About the last person I would expect to sound like a Radical Agnostic. With such encouragement, we will have to extend our door-to-door conversion efforts. We will have to expand from knocking on one door every 1000 years to ringing a doorbell at least once every hundred years. Sorry about all the evangelism. 14. Victoria

Frank I agree, I don’t think anyone has enough information.

About the last person I would expect to sound like a Radical Agnostic.

With such encouragement, we will have to extend our door-to-door conversion efforts. We will have to expand from knocking on one door every 1000 years to ringing a doorbell at least once every hundred years. Sorry about all the evangelism.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: dad dog http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233679 dad dog Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:40:21 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233679 I should clarify my last comment. The People would still need to prove that the boy <b>intended</b> to start the fire, so there is some willfulness involved in proving the case. However, under §452, they would <b>not</b> need to prove that he actually intended to cause the damage that was eventually done . . . only that he was indifferent to that potential. I should clarify my last comment. The People would still need to prove that the boy intended to start the fire, so there is some willfulness involved in proving the case.

However, under §452, they would not need to prove that he actually intended to cause the damage that was eventually done . . . only that he was indifferent to that potential.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: dad dog http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233678 dad dog Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:33:07 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233678 As a California prosecutor, allow me to weigh in: It is <b>not</b> always necessary to establish "malicious intent" in all crimes. There are some crimes where <b>recklessness</b> or <b>negligence</b> are the only "intents" required (e.g., certain types of manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter, etc.) Arson is one of those. There are intentional arson sections, but there is also California Penal Code §452: "A person is guilty of unlawfully causing a fire when he recklessly sets fire to or burns or causes to be burned, any structure, forest land or property." However, before that can be charged in this case, the People will still need to find that the boy's actions were "reckless;" i.e., that he was indifferent to the potential consequences of his actions. That would probably depend, as others have written here, on his history, maturity, etc. As a California prosecutor, allow me to weigh in:

It is not always necessary to establish “malicious intent” in all crimes. There are some crimes where recklessness or negligence are the only “intents” required (e.g., certain types of manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter, etc.)

Arson is one of those. There are intentional arson sections, but there is also California Penal Code §452: “A person is guilty of unlawfully causing a fire when he recklessly sets fire to or burns or causes to be burned, any structure, forest land or property.”

However, before that can be charged in this case, the People will still need to find that the boy’s actions were “reckless;” i.e., that he was indifferent to the potential consequences of his actions. That would probably depend, as others have written here, on his history, maturity, etc.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Victoria http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233652 Victoria Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:00:42 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233652 Frank I agree, I don't think anyone has enough information. Whatever money anyone could obtain by suing the parents would not be kind, as I'm sure they didn't encourage their son to play with matches. What good could come from taking everything away from this family, since it could never cover the cost of what has been lost. I'm sure the parents are very sad, and discouraged, not to mentioned ashamed of the actions of their son. We can pray for this family, that they will find comfort in Christ - Frank I agree, I don’t think anyone has enough information.

Whatever money anyone could obtain by suing the parents would not be kind, as I’m sure they didn’t encourage their son to play with matches.

What good could come from taking everything away from this family, since it could never cover the cost of what has been lost. I’m sure the parents are very sad, and discouraged, not to mentioned ashamed of the actions of their son.

We can pray for this family, that they will find comfort in Christ -

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Frank in Phoenix http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233647 Frank in Phoenix Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:40:55 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233647 With the limited info we have been given here: There will most certainly be a civil lawsuit against the parents. How that will wind up, only a lawyer/insurance professional can probably say. But criminal prosecution? This was by all appearances an accident arising from stupidity. No malicious intent, no crime. Unless the kid has a history of arson/pyromania and his parents failed to take reasonable measures to restrain him in that regard, I don't see the point of criminal prosecution. With the limited info we have been given here:

There will most certainly be a civil lawsuit against the parents. How that will wind up, only a lawyer/insurance professional can probably say.

But criminal prosecution? This was by all appearances an accident arising from stupidity. No malicious intent, no crime.

Unless the kid has a history of arson/pyromania and his parents failed to take reasonable measures to restrain him in that regard, I don’t see the point of criminal prosecution.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: A http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233560 A Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:40:30 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233560 Unless it can be shown that the boy intentionally and maliciously started the blaze, it would be ridiculous to prosecute him for the fires. It's a slippery slope argument to say that he is at fault. It's like saying, "Without George Washington, the US would not exist, thus George Washington should be prosecuted for all the injustice done by the US at home and abroad for the last 230 years." Who is at fault? Those who built a bonfire in waiting and failed to protect it are guilty of negligence. Who lit the match is irrelevant. Lightning or some other accidental spark would have lit the bonfire eventually. Unless it can be shown that the boy intentionally and maliciously started the blaze, it would be ridiculous to prosecute him for the fires. It’s a slippery slope argument to say that he is at fault. It’s like saying, “Without George Washington, the US would not exist, thus George Washington should be prosecuted for all the injustice done by the US at home and abroad for the last 230 years.”

Who is at fault? Those who built a bonfire in waiting and failed to protect it are guilty of negligence. Who lit the match is irrelevant. Lightning or some other accidental spark would have lit the bonfire eventually.

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Anlir http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233524 Anlir Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:26:24 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233524 I do wonder what the kids reaction was when he saw the massive fires on TV? Ten-to-one he was probably scared out of his gourd, (unless he's a juvenile delinquent or something). Can you imagine having to tell your dad that the massive fire he's watching on CNN was because you were playing with matches in the back yard? I hate to think what my daddy would have done to me! I do wonder what the kids reaction was when he saw the massive fires on TV? Ten-to-one he was probably scared out of his gourd, (unless he’s a juvenile delinquent or something). Can you imagine having to tell your dad that the massive fire he’s watching on CNN was because you were playing with matches in the back yard? I hate to think what my daddy would have done to me!

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: trr http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233470 trr Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:06:13 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233470 What good is it going to do to prosecute the boy? He's probably never gonna touch matches again in his life! What good is it going to do to prosecute the boy? He’s probably never gonna touch matches again in his life!

Report comment to moderator

]]> By: Random Name http://online.worldmag.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/comment-page-1/#comment-233463 Random Name Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:54:39 +0000 http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/01/boy-blamed-in-blaze/#comment-233463 It's no toughie. Burn him at the stake. What was good enough for great-great-great-great-great-great-grandpa should be good enough for us. It’s no toughie. Burn him at the stake. What was good enough for great-great-great-great-great-great-grandpa should be good enough for us.

Report comment to moderator

]]>