Dollywood Discussion Thread

[mikeykaise]

Right now the only charge is Reckless Arson but I have a feeling that if the Prosecutor doesn't file murder charges he'll either be in trouble or will not get re-elected.

[Devins3]

Not knowing the details it's hard to know.If it was just some kids who did it on accident then I don't think it would be right to charge them with murder. However there were multiple warnings to not have any open flame, I suppose it does really come down to the age of the kids and the details surrounding it.

 

That being said, I can't lie and say that if I lived there and lost my home or god forbid my family I wouldn't want them to get the electric chair. It's just a really awful situation all around, one of the Dollywood employees lost his wife and two childeren. Devestating doesn't even begin to describe this situation.

 

These kids who are charged also have families that I imagine would be devastated if they were convicted of murder because they played with matches on the wrong day at the wrong time. We can only speculate until more details are released.

 

I really love this area and have met many wonderful people at Dollywood and the surrounding area, my wife and I got married in Pigeon Forge and hope to move there someday. This disaster is just awful and I have the people I've met down there in my thoughts all the time.They will rebuild better and stronger in memory of those lost.

[Vonni]

Ok, I have a really stupid question so please forgive me, but I honestly don't know the answer. Is the term arson only used in purposefully set fires, or is it used for an unintentional fire as well?

[Comeagain?]

Ok, I have a really stupid question so please forgive me, but I honestly don't know the answer. Is the term arson only used in purposefully set fires, or is it used for an unintentional fire as well?

 

Arson is purposefully set fires. Accidents are unintentional.

[njcoasterguy34]

Ok, I have a really stupid question so please forgive me,

 

One of my high school teachers told me the only stupid question is the one left unasked.

[dstephe9]

Ok, I have a really stupid question so please forgive me, but I honestly don't know the answer. Is the term arson only used in purposefully set fires, or is it used for an unintentional fire as well?

 

Arson is purposefully set fires. Accidents are unintentional.

Exactly, so if they are calling it Arson, I believe an accident is out of the question.. Also, a few local reports from a week or so ago said they had found the fuel cans that helped start the fire (no idea how true this is or not).. But the fire was said to start around Chimney Tops trail.. young kids shouldn't be on that trail alone so if there weren't any parents around, these kids are probably high school.. if parents were around, there is no excuse either. Multiple warnings, even signs going in and out of the park, and even signs on the interstate warned about the burn ban.. if it was younger kids who found their parents matches while they were gone (playing games like flick match that I see kids at scout camp play all the time), it's a different story but I don't believe that is the case knowing the area and the rumors on the news about fuel cans being found..

 

Eitherway, any idea how old the kids are? I feel if they are smart enough to start a fire, even as a joke, they know the consequences.. I feel they should be held 100% liable for not only Arson, but murder and even attempted murder. I know this saying "kids will be kids" but if they are high school age, or even late middle school, they should know better..

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Edited December 8, 2016 by dstephe9

[I Like Theme Parks.]

^It wouldn't just be attempted murder if they got charged with that. They succeeded 14 times.

[dstephe9]

That's what I'm saying, should be charged with both making it harder for them to get out of prison in the future on parole or something

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[coasterbill]

I know nothing about our criminal justice system so I won't bother making a comment about the specifics of it and looking like a dumbass but if they are guilty then I hope the punishment fits the incredible severity of the crime, I don't particularly care how old they are.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

Ok, I have a really stupid question so please forgive me,

 

One of my high school teachers told me the only stupid question is the one left unasked.

I loved asking teachers who said that a question like "If a train left Boston going vertically, how many kangaroos will fit on the square root of pi?" They generally changed their opinion on whether stupid questions exist.

[boldikus]

so I won't bother making a comment about the specifics of it and looking like a dumbass

 

Yeah, as expected, feels like an awful lot of people around here suddenly passed the bar overnight.

[dstephe9]

so I won't bother making a comment about the specifics of it and looking like a dumbass

 

Yeah, as expected, feels like an awful lot of people around here suddenly passed the bar overnight.

I don't believe anyone has said anything about how things will play out like they just passed the bar.. it looks like most people, myself included, are just giving their opinion on the subject

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[jynx242]

so I won't bother making a comment about the specifics of it and looking like a dumbass

 

Yeah, as expected, feels like an awful lot of people around here suddenly passed the bar overnight.

 

It was easy!!

 

Anywho..... I'm glad they know who did it. I'm not sure how the legal aspects will play out on it, but I do hope that some kind of learning about the dangers of forest fires comes out of it. Smokey the Bear needs some exposure here.

 

D

[prozach626]

I feel they should be held 100% liable for not only Arson, but murder and even attempted murder. I know this saying "kids will be kids" but if they are high school age, or even late middle school, they should know better..

 

^It wouldn't just be attempted murder if they got charged with that. They succeeded 14 times.

 

That's what I'm saying, should be charged with both making it harder for them to get out of prison in the future on parole or something

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

Guys, you can't just charge someone with murder (homicide), just because people died... This is an area I have working experience with, although not specifically in the state of Tennessee. I understand people want to throw the book at these kids, but in order for a certain crime to be committed, it has to fit the wording of the specific law and intent has to exist. Manslaughter? Probably. Homicide? Not even close, unless there is some specific statute in reference to irresponsibly starting a forest fire. The State's Attorney's office is going to charge them appropriately and to the most severe extent. It will take some council to decide which charges to file which will be most fitting and have the highest likeliness to lead to a conviction, weighed against the severity of the crime. Hence the scales of justice.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

Thanks, Zach. We needed some reason here. I know the police need to have a charge in order to arrest someone, but is it possible for those charges to change? In other words, if someone is brought in on one charge, could they actually be tried under a completely different charge? I'm not sure what aggravated arson is, or why that's different from regular arson. I assume it's just different levels of dumbassery. But if it turns out that's not the right charge, can that just be changed to a better one? I hope I'm asking that in a way that makes sense.

[prozach626]

Good question. Yes, someone can be brought in for the probable cause of one charge. Say for instance in this case they had clear probable cause for criminal damage, regardless of the circumstances. They could bring the kids in on that charge, hold them on it, and then confer with the prosecutors at State's Attorney's office for a more appropriate or severe charge. Also, aggravated dumbassery (love it!) is a higher offense than regular dumbassery. In Illinois, battery is a misdemeanor where as aggravated battery, usually great bodily harm or battery with a weapon, is a felony.

 

Just as a disclaimer, all of my knowledge is mostly in reference to Illinois law and how we do things locally. In Illinois, Aggravated Arson is usually when someone knowingly and intentionally sets fire to an occupied area or structure. A homicide could be the result of an aggravated arson, but I believe being charged with 'both' would be considered double jeopardy in that case.

 

It's also really hard for me to say with certainty what the prosecution is going to do from my standpoint, because I would imagine there are more specific statutes related to forest fires in this region. We typically don't have such problems where I'm from.

[coasterbill]

Thanks for the insight. I was hoping you would chime in since (to my knowledge, though I'm prepared to be wrong) you're the only active member of the forum with any actual knowledge of these types of things.

[STDog]

I recall something about foreseeable results. So arson, being a purposeful act, and a death as a result would be homicide.

 

Pretty sure people have been convicted of murder after burning a supposed empty building the wasn't empty.

 

As to double jeopardy, that usually means a second trial for the same act. But people are charged and convicted of multiple charges in a single trial all the time.

 

I see 13 counts of murder (2nd degree? Through the accompanying felony may bump it up) and one count of arson. Possibly some more (reckless endangerment?) The lady who died getting out of Wears Valley (hear attack?) probably won't meet the murder statutes.

[prozach626]

You could have a point. After further thinking about it, there is a chance the prosecution may actually try to charge homicide 2nd degree. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that the prosecution will expect a conviction for 13 counts of Homicide, BUT, they could charge Homocide with hopes that an adult conviction or plea for aggravated arson will be more of a sure thing. Prosecutors do this sort of thing all the time. Also, in case anyone is interested:

EDIT: Damnit... it defaulted to Illinois Compiled statutes from my search. I'll try to find TN law.

Edited December 8, 2016 by prozach626

[prozach626]

Here. Found it. Here's TN's Aggravated Arson statute:

http://www.tncrimlaw.com/TPI_Crim/13_02.htm

 

AGGRAVATED ARSON

Any person who commits the offense of aggravated arson is guilty of a crime.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the state must have proven beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the following essential elements:1

[Part A:

(1) that the defendant by means of fire or explosion, damaged a structure

(as described in the indictment);

and

(2)(a) that the defendant did so without the consent of all persons who

have a possessory, proprietary or security interest therein;

or

(b) that the defendant did so with intent to [destroy] [damage] the

structure [to collect insurance for the damage or destruction] [for

any unlawful purpose];

and

(3)(a) that one or more persons were present therein;

or

(b) that a person, including a firefighter and law enforcement official,

suffered serious bodily injury as a result of the fire or explosion;

and

(4) that the defendant acted knowingly].

or

[Part B:

(1) that the defendant damaged by fire or explosion the [personal

property] [land] [other property except buildings or structures];

and

(2)(a) that the defendant did so without the consent of all persons who

have a possessory, proprietary or security interest therein;

or

(b) that the defendant had intent to destroy or damage the said

property for an unlawful purpose;

and

(3)(a) that one or more persons were present therein;

or

(b) that a person, including a firefighter and law enforcement official,

suffered serious bodily injury as a result of the fire or explosion;

and

(4) that the defendant acted knowingly].

"Knowingly" means that a person acts knowingly with respect to the conduct or to circumstances surrounding the conduct when the person is aware of the nature of the conduct or that the circumstances exist. A person acts knowingly with respect to a result of the person's conduct when the person is aware that the conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result.2

The requirement of "knowingly" is also established if it is shown that the defendant acted intentionally.3

"Intentionally" means that a person acts intentionally with respect to the nature of the conduct or to a result of the conduct when it is the person's conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or cause the result.4

"Property" means anything of value, including but not limited to [money] [real estate] [tangible or intangible personal property (including anything severed from land)] [library material] [contract rights] [chose-in-action] [interest in or claim to wealth] [credit] [admission or transportation tickets] [captured or domestic animals] [food and drink] [electric or other power].5

"Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury which involves a substantial risk of death; protracted unconsciousness; extreme physical pain; protracted or obvious disfigurement; or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ or mental faculty.6

 

 

 

Here's TN's 2nd Degree Murder, which is worded a bit differently from what I'm familiar with. Seems like it may fit. I wouldn't be surprised if they charge this now that I look at it. Again, maybe not necessarily for a 2nd degree murder conviction, but so they can try them as adults and at the very least get a clean Aggravated Arson conviction. This is as opposed to charging the kids with Aggravated Arson and risking getting a conviction or plea for something like misdemeanor Reckless Burning. Hell, who knows. They could get tried and convicted for 2nd Degree Murder, period. Either way, their lives are probably ruined at this point.

Any person who commits second degree murder is guilty of a crime.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the state must have proven beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the following essential elements:1

(1) that the defendant unlawfully killed the alleged victim;

and

(2) that the defendant acted knowingly.

"Intentionally" means that a person acts intentionally when it is the person's conscious objective or desire to cause the death of the alleged victim.2

"Knowingly" means that a person acts with an awareness that [his] [her]

conduct is reasonably certain to cause the death of the alleged victim.3

http://www.tncrimlaw.com/TPI_Crim/07_05_a.htm

 

Illinois is a little more lenient, as most of the laws I deal with are when a defendant acts Knowingly and Intentionally. Either way, that's enough effort from me on this topic, now that I've managed to almost completely contradict my original statement... These are the two laws which seem most applicable. Everything else is speculation or 'wait and see.'

[ytterbiumanalyst]

Thanks so much, Zach. This is really great information to get a proper perspective on this incident.

[bluestreak]

This is just really interesting stuff to be honest. Thanks for this.

[STDog]

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2016/12/09/sources-teens-toying-matches-started-fatal-wildfire/95210356/

 

Of note to the recent discussion:

"aggravated arson is a crime for which a charge of felony murder — a death that results from the commission of certain felonies -- can be legally supported.''

 

I was off, it would be 1st Degree Murder

" (2) A killing of another committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any first degree murder, act of terrorism, arson, rape, robbery, burglary, theft, kidnapping, aggravated child abuse, aggravated child neglect, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child or aircraft piracy"

 

http://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2010/title-39/chapter-13/part-2/39-13-202

[dstephe9]

Also looks like all of this might of been started just by goofing off

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[STDog]

Also looks like all of this might of been started just by goofing off

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

It's all fun and games until someone loses and eye (or starts a wildfire)