Yates Road Fire Cause

User avatar
preciosa
Posts: 80
Joined: Apr 16th, 2007, 6:50 am

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by preciosa »

Did they come forward themselves and admit it? OR... Did they just get caught and confess? BIG difference here!
common_sense_guy
Übergod
Posts: 1226
Joined: Nov 23rd, 2017, 12:40 pm

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by common_sense_guy »

daria wrote:As bad as what these minors did is, I am glad that they came forward and admitted that they were responsible. That can't be said for many young people these days.

How do you know they admitted it without someone saying I saw you guys running from there. If nobody had a clue these kids didn't I highly doubt they would have came forward and said Dad we did that. Most likely someone saw them in the area around that time and they got questioned about it and then they admitted. I highly doubt and would put money on it that they never came forward unless they were suspected and questioned first . Any of you that have kids or know kids know that they will lie to the end even if they've been busted . This may not be the case here but I highly doubt they came forward on their own will .Why can nobody read between the lines. most people just assumed because they admitted to it that they did it without being suspected. And some of you people want to praise them for admitting it. Let's get all the facts first. Wasn't there a report some kids were seen running from the area earlier. Make an example of them and have their parents pay a huge amount towards the fire fighting cost and let that story carry all over the news and see how many stupid kids then start a fire.. my Johnny he's a good kid he admitted to it sure he's a arsonist but he admitted to it so that's good right.( heavy sarcasm)
You don't learn when you are talking. You can only learn while you're listening.
common_sense_guy
Übergod
Posts: 1226
Joined: Nov 23rd, 2017, 12:40 pm

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by common_sense_guy »

daria wrote:The homes of my family members and friends whom I love dearly were in jeopardy, too, but I can still say that it took courage for those children (and at 9 & 11 they are KIDS) to admit that they were responsible. This doesn't absolve them entirely, but it is refreshing to see honesty from kids!
how can you suggest it absolves them even in the least because they admitted to it..
You don't learn when you are talking. You can only learn while you're listening.
User avatar
alanjh595
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 18676
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 5:18 pm

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by alanjh595 »

preciosa wrote:Did they come forward themselves and admit it? OR... Did they just get caught and confess? BIG difference here!


OH....come on......

Were they read their rights, did they understand those rights before answering any questions?
Were they represented by legal council?

Do you expect a 9 year old and an 11 year old to step up before they are questioned?
Were they even aware that this fire was caused by them? After all, they stomped out the fire they started and went home.

Adults do dumb things all the time, usually preceded by the statement, "Hold my beer and watch this".
Bring back the LIKE button.
User avatar
Piecemaker
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 12071
Joined: Jun 6th, 2007, 8:43 pm

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by Piecemaker »

Re: Criminal charges discussion by previous posters...
dle wrote:Age of Majority in BC is 19, not 18. Not all the Provinces are the same....


Federally a young person is considered an adult at age 18. They can vote and they are also considered adults in criminal court.
Once a young person turns 18 in BC, they appear in adult court, even though the age of majority in BC is 19. If a crime is significantly serious (caused death of another for example), an application can be made to have a youth under age 18 moved to adult court.

I live in N. Glenmore, although we were not on evacuation alert. I have several younger brothers and if they found a lighter I can see any of them doing the very same thing those two boys did when they were their age. My brothers were all good kids and would never have deliberately done anything to damage another's property. We were raised to be respectful and responsible...including when it comes to fire. (One brother did use a magnifying glass to start a fire on our lawn. I may have been party to that. We were unsuccessful.)
It's possible to do all the right things and still get a bad result.
User avatar
alanjh595
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 18676
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 5:18 pm

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by alanjh595 »

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Jul 28th, 2018, 10:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off Topic
Bring back the LIKE button.
User avatar
goatboy
Guru
Posts: 6025
Joined: Feb 26th, 2008, 8:56 pm

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by goatboy »

These kids will not be charged, regardless of whether anyone thinks they should be, they're too young. A child under 12 cannot be charged with a crime in BC. However, there is the Parental Liability Act which states:

Parent's liability:
3 Subject to section 6 and Part 3, if a child intentionally takes, damages or destroys property of another person, a parent of the child is liable for the loss of or damage to the property experienced as a result by an owner and by a person legally entitled to possession of the property.

So, in this case, the land that was damaged or destroyed (either city or private property owner), could start a small claims action to recoup it's losses up to $10,000. The challenge would be to prove that it was intentional.
TylerM4
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3491
Joined: Feb 27th, 2014, 3:22 pm

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by TylerM4 »

dle wrote:
Sorry, I have to disagree here....the lighting of the fire in this case according to the quote of Tim Light of the fire department was that they found a lighter and INTENTIONALLY LIT A FIRE....the fact it got away on them after they thought they put it out and raced up the hill was the UNINTENTIONAL result of the deliberate act of lighting that fire, but, according to the reports,the fire itself was NOT "accidentally" started through no fault of those kids. By the sounds of things there was no CRIMINAL intent but that doesn't mean the original small fire they lit, on purpose, wasn't INTENTIONAL. That fire did NOT start by accident even though they weren't thinking ahead to how bad things could/would get.


Dude. It amazes me that you can't seem to understand this.

Perhaps you need to review the definition of the word Accident? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accident

Let me explain it in black and white - "if the kids didn't intend to start a wildfire, it was started accidentally". It's that simple. It doesn't matter what series of events lead up to it. The fact remains that they didn't intentionally start a wildfire. Or another simple way to explain this "If you didn't do it on purpose, it was an accident".

You could accuse the kids of being negligent. It certainly wasn't smart and they likely knew better. But it's clear a wildfire wasn't intentionally set - therefor it was an accident.
bob vernon
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3752
Joined: Oct 27th, 2008, 10:37 am

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by bob vernon »

The cost of fighting this fire might be more than the parents' homes are worth. So let's take 'em to court and seize and sell the houses. And garnish future wages. That way we can force the parents out onto welfare or out onto the street. The kids will wind up in foster care, at public expense. And in despair, the parents might turn to drugs to temporarily hide the pain of their failed lives. You might find them pushing shopping carts around downtown in a year or two. Mission accomplished.
dle
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3326
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 12:29 pm

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by dle »

@alanjh595 said:

Adults do dumb things all the time, usually preceded by the statement, "Hold my beer and watch this"

:smt045

These kids were seen running away from the area but they might have been instinctively running for home to get an adult to help - pretty sure they would have been scared out of their wits by what was transpiring before their eyes and usually the first thought is oh-oh followed by get out of Dodge and run like hell to Dad or Mom to fix it. Not sure they would have been thinking clearly enough to be trying to formulate a whopper that would hold water, or even to stop at the nearest house for an adult to help - just going on pure adrenalin by that point and running like the wind for home and parental intervention...of course all I am doing is speculating as to what they were thinking - it just seems a plausible train of thought to me.
Last edited by dle on Jul 28th, 2018, 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
TreeGuy
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3442
Joined: Oct 9th, 2005, 10:02 pm

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by TreeGuy »

alanjh595 wrote:
OH....come on......

Were they read their rights, did they understand those rights before answering any questions?
Were they represented by legal council?

Do you expect a 9 year old and an 11 year old to step up before they are questioned?
Were they even aware that this fire was caused by them? After all, they stomped out the fire they started and went home.

Adults do dumb things all the time, usually preceded by the statement, "Hold my beer and watch this".


According to the witness she saw someone running from the area after the fire started and with that the K-9 unit was brought in possibly leading to the fire starters.

I don’t think they were at home eating bologna sandwiches after their mother called them in for lunch.
dle
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3326
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 12:29 pm

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by dle »

TylerM4 wrote:
dle wrote:
Sorry, I have to disagree here....the lighting of the fire in this case according to the quote of Tim Light of the fire department was that they found a lighter and INTENTIONALLY LIT A FIRE....the fact it got away on them after they thought they put it out and raced up the hill was the UNINTENTIONAL result of the deliberate act of lighting that fire, but, according to the reports,the fire itself was NOT "accidentally" started through no fault of those kids. By the sounds of things there was no CRIMINAL intent but that doesn't mean the original small fire they lit, on purpose, wasn't INTENTIONAL. That fire did NOT start by accident even though they weren't thinking ahead to how bad things could/would get.


Dude. It amazes me that you can't seem to understand this.

Perhaps you need to review the definition of the word Accident? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accident

Let me explain it in black and white - "if the kids didn't intend to start a wildfire, it was started accidentally". It's that simple. It doesn't matter what series of events lead up to it. The fact remains that they didn't intentionally start a wildfire. Or another simple way to explain this "If you didn't do it on purpose, it was an accident".

You could accuse the kids of being negligent. It certainly wasn't smart and they likely knew better. But it's clear a wildfire wasn't intentionally set - therefor it was an accident.


soooo let me get this straight...hypothetically you take a bat and clock a guy over the head .....he is diagnosed with a life-altering brain injury as a direct result of that whack ....but you would claim the brain injury is not your fault because you didn't INTEND to cause him a life-altering brain injury, all you intended was hit him with the bat? He somehow accidentally got the brain injury? How am I doing so far? Anything else you'd like to school me on?
User avatar
TreeGuy
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3442
Joined: Oct 9th, 2005, 10:02 pm

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by TreeGuy »

TylerM4 wrote:
Dude. It amazes me that you can't seem to understand this.

Perhaps you need to review the definition of the word Accident? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accident

Let me explain it in black and white - "if the kids didn't intend to start a wildfire, it was started accidentally". It's that simple. It doesn't matter what series of events lead up to it. The fact remains that they didn't intentionally start a wildfire. Or another simple way to explain this "If you didn't do it on purpose, it was an accident".

You could accuse the kids of being negligent. It certainly wasn't smart and they likely knew better. But it's clear a wildfire wasn't intentionally set - therefor it was an accident.


How is that a FACT? We may never know their true intentions. Kids are great with coming up with stories to cover their little butts.
voice of reason
Übergod
Posts: 1972
Joined: Feb 22nd, 2009, 11:40 am

Re: Yates Road - Grass Fire

Post by voice of reason »

dle wrote:
soooo let me get this straight...hypothetically you take a bat and clock a guy over the head .....he is diagnosed with a life-altering brain injury as a direct result of that whack ....but you would claim the brain injury is not your fault because you didn't INTEND to cause him a life-altering brain injury, all you intended was hit him with the bat? He somehow accidentally got the brain injury? How am I doing so far? Anything else you'd like to school me on?

that is exactly the argument your lawyer would make in that situation
User avatar
Symbonite
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3961
Joined: Feb 16th, 2005, 9:30 am

Re: Yates Road Fire Cause

Post by Symbonite »

Throw the book at them or parents...
**Disclaimer: The above statement is in my OPINION only.

Return to “Fire Watch 2018”