Transient ordered to pay $101M for setting California fires

[rsmith6621]

LOS ANGELES – A homeless man has been sentenced to nearly four years in prison and ordered to pay more than $101 million for starting two fires, including one that burned more than 163,000 acres in California two years ago.

Fifty-year-old Steven Emory Butcher was convicted in February of starting blazes in the Los Padres National Forest in 2002 and 2006.

The 2006 fire raged for more than a month and cost more than $78 million to suppress. It injured 18 people, destroyed 11 structures and was the fifth-largest fire in California history, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

The 2002 blaze burned 70 acres.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081118/ap_on_re_us/wildfire_conviction


So Basically He Will Never Get Ahead.....He might well just stay homeless when he get out of prison.

[GodlessBiker]

1. Yes, they should have given him a chance and cut the fine to 10 million.

[originalpckelly]

2. And people wonder what's wrong with America:

"A homeless man has been sentenced to nearly four years in prison and ordered to pay more than $101 million for starting two fires..."

Yeah, it really makes sense to fine a homeless man for $101 million. "Yeah, I've got to work this fine off for the rest of my life." "How much is it?" "$101 million." "Holy shit."

[Ian David]

3. Oh, please. All he has to do is run for The Senate as a Republican in Alaska.

He'll be all paid-up in a year or two.

[earth mom]

18. self delete

[NeedleCast]

19. The fine part is stupid

but he was convicted of a pretty serious crime here, so the prison time is justified.

[loyalkydem]

4. Besides

Just how do they think he's going to pay them? He's fuckin homeless for petes sake

[LisaL]

8. Everybody knows it would be impossible to recover that

much money out of him.
The fine is probably more symbolic than anything else.

[nancyr]

5. Well then, that should take care of it.

[ismnotwasm]

52. Word n/t

[RollWithIt]

6. Wait, so you're upset that an arsonist who caused over a 100 million in damage has to pay?

I'm a little confused by your post.

[TwilightZone]

9. I was wondering that myself.

[timtom]

10. Perhaps it's the absurdity of fining a homeless man

a fine he will never be able to pay.

[Lyric]

11. He's not an arsonist.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Schizophrenic-Transient-Ordered-to-Pay-101M-for-Starting-2006-Day-Fire.html

He's a homeless paranoid schizophrenic who was living out in the woods, and tossed a cigarette butt somewhere that he shouldn't have. He's seriously mentally ill, and potentially a hazard to himself and others, but even the judge admitted that he wasn't an "arsonist."

Shit like this wouldn't happen if we had decent health care for everyone. The mentally disturbed shouldn't be left to wander around on their own, because they aren't coherent or rational enough to understand the dangers around them.

And yeah--the fine is WAY fucking overboard. He needs to be placed in a mental institution and treated for his paranoid schizophrenia, not locked in federal prison with no hope of ever having ANY kind of a life when he gets out.

[dysfunctional press]

20. why do people get away with murder by being mentally ill, but this guy doesn't?

:shrug:

[Lyric]

31. Crazy people do not "get away with murder" because they do not *commit* murder.

Murder = intentionally, deliberately taking someone's life while being "of sound mind" enough to know the difference between right and wrong.

Insane people are not "of sound mind," and cannot distinguish between right and wrong. Therefore, they cannot murder. For example, under New York law:

Mental disease or defect. In any prosecution for an offense, it is an affirmative defense that when the defendant engaged in the proscribed conduct, he lacked criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease or defect. Such lack of criminal responsibility means that at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect, he lacked substantial capacity to know or appreciate either: 1. The nature and consequences of such conduct; or 2. That such conduct was wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder#Exclusions

[dysfunctional press]

34. not true.

people can be found "not guilty' by reason of insanity, but they can also be found 'guilty' but mentally insane.
two different verdicts, and two different outcomes for the perpetrator.

[RollWithIt]

22. Ok, the guy is mentally ill, I'll give you that, but we're not talking about one accident...

They got him on TWO fires four years apart. And those are the only ones they could make stick. Mentally ill people can be arsonists too.

[Lyric]

28. "Mentally ill" people can indeed be arsonists, but this guy isn't one.

Arson is a crime of deliberately setting a fire in order to cause property damage. From what I've read, this guy is just careless with his cigarette butts--not a surprise, considering that he's schizophrenic and living-in-the-woods-homeless to boot. Anyway, for it to be arson, there MUST be intent to cause property damage for an "improper purpose." It doesn't appear that his intent was to cause a raging wildfire that destroyed a bunch of property. It looks more like a case of his mental illness interfering with good judgement, leading to irresponsible behaviors that resulted in two fires.

I agree with the judge that he's a danger to society as he is, but federal prison isn't the answer. A secure inpatient mental health facility where he can both get his illness treated and learn to live again in civilized society would be a much more fitting consequence. I sincerely hope that's what happens in the end for this fellow. Even dangerous, crazy people deserve the chance to at least be humanely treated while being kept safely away from society.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. Then he should be locked up until he is cured and no longer a danger to the general public

[Lyric]

25. I agree, although I don't think there's a cure for schizophrenia

But prison is only going to make him worse, not better. I hope he is eventually transferred to an inpatient mental health facility. I can't imagine that he'd complain much; he'd get his sanity back, plus a warm bed, regular meals, and some stability and safety in the bargain.

[greguganus]

30. I've always wondered...

...why it only takes one cigarette butt to start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box of matches to light a grill.

[Greyhound]

44. Because we have become short-sighted and mean spirited as a nation.

Our people see prison as a means of vengeance, not even playing lip service to rehabilitation for their inevitable return to society anymore.

[truedelphi]

54. The stats on how many of those in prison are just people

With untreated mental illnesses is staggering.

At a cost of over $ 35k a year, it is an insane policy.

For that same $ 35 K they could be living in a fairly nice Developmentally Disabled center.

My last trip into San Francisco, there was a paranoid schoizophrenic woman, homeless and on the streets, surrounded by several shopping carts with her belongings, talking waway to God and everyone else.

She looked so much like clients who live in comfy developmental centers where I have worked that I almost cried.

How can the (former) greatest nation on earth do this to people??

[LynneSin]

47. Well he may never get ahead in life because of this

You know, one fire I suppose I would think this is harsh but two fires - the guy has a problem and should be locked up.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. Tough Shit On Him. Being Homeless Doesn't Mean You Aren't Subjected To The Law.

Why should he receive different penalty than anyone else? Look at the damage he did? Being homeless doesn't mean you get slaps on the wrist for shit like that.

[HereSince1628]

17. True, being elected pResident or Vice President is the requirement for being above the law...n/t

[High Plains]

42. Yeah. What Was That Paranoid Schizophrenic Guy Thinking?

He should have known better. He must be punished to the full extent of the law. Now, where did that sarcasm thingie go?

[VP505]

53. Its right next to all

the money that's been saved by Raygun's policy of emptying out the mental health facilities and NOT providing care for those suffering form mental illness..

[Iggo]

12. It's such an exercise in futility...

...that it borders on stupidity.

It does nothing for anyone, except maybe the punishment fetishists.

[rurallib]

13. he is ahead right now. He now has a home for 4 years.

[CitizenPatriot]

14. he started 2 separate fires

and he's only going to be in jail for 4 years???

Wildfires take lives (firefighters, homeowners, animals), not to mention the environmental damage, the air quality which impacts the health of all who breath it, and the money they cost to fight and the rebuild. Federal money goes into the fighting efforts and the rebuilding efforts (insurance) -- so we all pay for this man's propensity to set fires. And it's heart-breaking to realize how many pets, horses, etc are left behind because the owners have no choice. One road in and one road out.

[tularetom]

15. They can order whatever the hell they want

and maybe it makes somebody feel good that they fined some homeless dude $101 million, but it just makes them look stupid to do it. After all he's 50 years old and they just sentenced him to 4 years in prison. Assuming he actually had any productive years left, he has to give up four of them from the git go.

Maybe he should ask Secretary of the Treasury Paulson for a bail out.

[LittleApple81]

16. He is NOT AN ARSONIST. see post 11. PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC.

He is mentally ill, and society does not take care of mental patients anymore.

[spinbaby]

21. If you've ever known a paranoid schizophrenic,

you know just how disconnected from reality they are. I've known two and can tell you that when they're not properly medicated they have no clue what's reality and what's not. I knew one who consumed nothing but Twinkies and vodka until he was hospitalized with a bleeding gut because those were the only "safe" things that weren't poisoned. I've known one who, when things got bad, couldn't correctly identify what time and day it was. The man who set those fires needs treatment, not jail and fines.

[LittleApple81]

27. I have a very dear friend that has that decease. It got so bad she was sleeping in the

street and thought the CIA and FBI were after her. She became violent, and drove her family to bankruptcy so she could not get more treatment... And she was such an intelligent and charming person before this illness took over.

[JonQ]

24. I'm guessing it's mostly symbolic

and the judge never really expects to collect. And if he did it intentionally then 4 years is not enough. And if he was indeed insane then he needs to be removed from society and put in a mental institution for the rest of his days or until he is treated. We can't let these people roam free who are a danger to society either out of intent or mental illness.

Also, anyone else notice the du advertisement on this thread?

[slackmaster]

26. Only four years in prison?

The guy deserves 40 years.

[gollygee]

29. Well I think it's obvious they'll never see the 101 million

they might have put that on there so they don't set a precedent that someone can light fires and not pay the damage.

But he should be in a psychiatric hospital rather than in prison.

[greguganus]

32. They should of dropped the fine and given him more time in jail. n/t

[High Plains]

43. Why don't they treat his mental illness instead?

And why didn't they treat it before? What's that saying about an ounce of prevention?

Ah, but this is America: No money to help fucked up people, only money for prisons to put them in.

[greguganus]

57. Hopefully he will get help in prison. Hell, prisoners get dental, etc. & we can't on the outside!nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. Maybe he can claim he's "too big to fail" and tap congress for a bailout.

[123infinity]

35. Well, he'll be 54 when he gets out...if he lives to 70 he can pay easy monthly installments of

only 526,000 bucks.
:shrug:

[Evoman]

36. How did they know it was him?

:shrug:

[Pithlet]

40. That's what I don't get.

How many smokers flicked cigarette butts in what is bound to be a large area in that given time frame? I think this is a case of needing a scapegoat. The fact is that area is prone to wildfires. Different areas of the country are prone to different disasters. It's a horrible fact of life. I think blaming this poor guy and tossing him in jail and fining him seems way over the top. If someone deliberately starts a fire that causes that much damage, then hell yes, throw the book at them. But daily normal acts that that on any given day hundreds if not thousands of people may be engaging in, that just happens to unfortunately trigger a natural event? That's ridiculous.

[ContinentalOp]

45. Oops, sorry it was just an accident. Just a bit of fun.

:eyes:

Steven Emory Butcher, 50, was convicted in February of igniting the monthlong Day fire in 2006 that injured 18 people, destroyed 11 structures and cost more than $100 million to suppress, according to the U.S. attorney's office. He had been burning debris on Labor Day in Piru Canyon, where he had set up a campsite.

The jury also convicted Butcher of starting the 70-acre Ellis fire four years earlier, about two miles southeast of where the Day Fire began.

Butcher was found guilty of two felony counts of starting fires and three misdemeanor counts of allowing a fire to escape his control, violating restrictions by building a fire on federal forest land and smoking in a federal forest.

"If I would have been on the jury, I would have found myself guilty too," Butcher told U.S. District Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank.


http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-butcher18-2008nov18,0,2733169.story

[Pithlet]

46. No need to roll your eyes at me.

You could have just answered my question nicely. What a novel concept on DU. People in this thread were attributing it to a cigarette. Excuse the hell out of me.

Anyway, there's still the question of his mental competency. If he's schizophrenic, I still think it's draconian to charge him as if he's mentally competent. This still reeks of scapegoating. Wildfires are going to happen in CA, just like tornadoes are going to happen in the midwest. If he didn't start it, something else was going to.

[ContinentalOp]

48. What part of arson don't you understand?

There are naturally occurring conditions that make these fires possible but they are still set by humans. I don't care if it was a cigarette (which is illegal to be smoking in a state park anyway). He's still responsible.

What about the people like those two kids from Illinois who set the Hollywood hills on fire? We should just say "oops it was an accident, a fire would have happened anyway" and let the arsonists off the hook?

[Pithlet]

49. Arson means the intent was to cause damage.

It seems you are the one who doesn't understand. It also seems you don't understand what being mentally ill means.

Where in my posts did you get the idea that I meant no one should ever be punished for setting fires that cause damage? It's seems you aren't understanding anything I'm posting, either. Obviously, if someone in full control of their mental faculties starts a fire intending to cause damage, or blatantly disregards laws and is grossly negligent in causing damage, then they should be held accountable. I believe I even said as much in my post. Sorry, but I don't think smoking a cigarette rises to that level. How many millions of smokers are there in California? How is anyone going to prove that one individual smoker is the cause of such a huge fire? Setting a bonfire? Sure, I can see that. A cigarette butt? I think more proof is needed than that if you're going to heap prison time and millions of dollars in fines, sorry. That does reek of "Someone needs to pay!!!!!", rather than true justice. And, I'm sorry, but I do think that people who are screaming for blood do need to remember that they live in a fire prone area, and no matter how much they scream for justice, fires are going to keep happening. I do. I'm sorry. I say this as someone who lives in a disaster prone area. Only we can't ever blame our disasters on anyone.

[Two Americas]

55. thank you

Thanks for bringing some sanity to the thread. There are some disgusting posts here.

If one carelessly tossed cigarette butt was sufficient to start these fires, then they were virtually certain to start one way or another. How do we know with certainty that it was this man's butt? That seems suspicious to me.

The man did not intentionally start a wild fire. That seems to be lost on some here.

[Pithlet]

58. Yes. I can understand the strong feelings.

I can think of few things more devastating than losing everything you own in a fire. My heart really does go out to everyone being affected by the fires. It must be very scary to have that happening near by, too. Of course, if someone deliberately starts a fire that causes mass destruction, that would be one thing. And reasonable fines should be meted out to those who violate laws meant to protect communities vulnerable to wildfires. But, this case the punishment seems way excessive.

[Javaman]

37. So not knowing anything about this guys background, I can only suppose that

he is homeless because of 1)mental illness 2)enormous credit loss due to a loss of a home, loved one, job, accident, education 3) had to declare bankruptcy due to outrageous medical bills 3)a habitual drug user 4)alienated by society because he was different somehow or 5) all of the above or some of the above.

We, society, fail this person and as a result, he commits a crime, he has to pay and we don't give it a second thought nor reflect upon the problem.

It reminds me of the old song by the Suicidal Tendencies, "institutionalized". The kid in the song does everything that is required of him by society, however one day, his parents catch him day dreaming and only wanting a pepsi, yet his parents accuse him of being on drugs and want to send him off to a mental institution.

WE all, as rational human beings try the best we can to play by the rules but yet when we are dealt a shitty hand, it's always our fault.

Yes, this guy should pay a penalty for starting the fire, no doubt, but fining him something that will basically put in him in a mental financial prison for the rest of his life with out any rehab or examination as to why he started the fire, is, in my opinion, the wrong action.

Before we cast rocks upon the homeless, we must first look upon ourselves as a society and see where we failed. When punishing people who commit crimes such as these, we also have to ask why and how did this person come to this point. It's only when asking those questions can we find a potential answer to hopefully cure some of the ills that plague our society.

This guy will more than likely die in prison.

Nothing solved nothing gained. The property is still gone and another nameless homeless person is dead.

And given our current state of affairs, there are more and more homeless people, homeless families and homeless vets on the streets every single day.

Will we ever be capable, as a nation, of critical self examination without the onus of that action being called wimpy?

rinse and recycle.

[ContinentalOp]

38. Four years isn't enough.

These people should be locked up for life. Especially those two teenagers from Illinois who thought it would be fun to set the Hollywood hills on fire. I wonder what happened to them?

[cobalt1999]

39. So as punishment he gets a bed and meals for the next 4 years?

A real punishment would be to make him homeless in say Detroit for 4 years.

[ContinentalOp]

41. Hey, as long as he's off the streets. -nt-

[meow2u3]

50. Where the hell is a homeless guy going to get the $101M?

Rob a bank? Even the banks don't have that kind of money!

Rob Warren Buffett? Oh no--he lives in the midsection of the country.


All kidding aside, I think that guy ought to appeal the fine. It's obviously an excessive fine and a violation of his 8th Amendment rights. No one besides a billionaire would be able to afford such a high fine.

[aikoaiko]

51. I know the fine for that person is absurd, but the fine is not contingent upon a person's ability ..

..to pay, but on the damage.

[Greyhound]

56. If only this nation had some place where people with mental health problems

could go for care and a place to live... oh wait, we did.

I guess this the price we have to pay in order to have more billionaires than any other nation. After all they contribute so much to our collective prosperity.:eyes: