Quoted:


I agree with you but according to a friend of mine "in the know" as it were, it ain't just grenades and improvised explosives in that house. There is supposedly some bad, bad things in there. Things of a non explosive nature.

Some of the info has made it's way to the media, there is "unknown powder" in the home and I read something on another board about an official who went in that house having his arm blister after contacting one of the interior walls of the home.

That is why they are making such a huge deal about the controlled burn (evacuating the entire neighborhood, shutting down a major freeway etc). Looks like overreaction to most, but I believe there is a very valid reason for the way they are handling this.

I hope they know exactly what they are doing by letting this place burn, if some of what is supposedly in there survives the temperatures of the fire and gets cast about by the wind, it could be very, very bad.

It is a conflicting situation for sure and they are not handling it all properly IMO. Have also read the city went out of it's way to get a ruling to declare the house a "public nuisance" thereby denying the owner of the property any compensation for his loss (it is a rental house). Poor guy will probably get stuck with the bill for hazmat cleanup too.

Will be interesting to see what comes out in trial. Unique situation for sure and I am conflicted about the need preserve evidence and the right of the BG to a fair trial VS something very, very nasty getting out of that place and spreading.



 

Quoted:


I agree with you but according to a friend of mine "in the know" as it were, it ain't just grenades and improvised explosives in that house. There is supposedly some bad, bad things in there. Things of a non explosive nature.

Some of the info has made it's way to the media, there is "unknown powder" in the home and I read something on another board about an official who went in that house having his arm blister after contacting one of the interior walls of the home.

That is why they are making such a huge deal about the controlled burn (evacuating the entire neighborhood, shutting down a major freeway etc). Looks like overreaction to most, but I believe there is a very valid reason for the way they are handling this.

I hope they know exactly what they are doing by letting this place burn, if some of what is supposedly in there survives the temperatures of the fire and gets cast about by the wind, it could be very, very bad.

It is a conflicting situation for sure and they are not handling it all properly IMO. Have also read the city went out of it's way to get a ruling to declare the house a "public nuisance" thereby denying the owner of the property any compensation for his loss (it is a rental house). Poor guy will probably get stuck with the bill for hazmat cleanup too.

Will be interesting to see what comes out in trial. Unique situation for sure and I am conflicted about the need preserve evidence and the right of the BG to a fair trial VS something very, very nasty getting out of that place and spreading.



 

Quoted:
Yeah a lot of explosives in a residential area might not be the best idear

From my country Bang at 1:10 and Big Bang at 2:13

Quoted:


Well, besides the gardener it hadn't got out up to this point, what's a few more months or whatever until they let the trial run its course?  On the surface, this certainly seems to be a pretty gross miscarriage of justice.  Especially the part about not compensating the property owner.

Quoted:


Well, besides the gardener it hadn't got out up to this point, what's a few more months or whatever until they let the trial run its course?  On the surface, this certainly seems to be a pretty gross miscarriage of justice.  Especially the part about not compensating the property owner.

Quoted:
Next: ARFCOMMER's homes will burn because the authorities claim their homes are "weapons factories"

Then they burn the "evidence" before trial.

Quoted:

So what?  He's not convicted yet, and as such is presumed innocent until proven otherwise (yeah, I know).  Good thing they burned his house the house belonging to the completely uninvolved and entirely innocent property owner down anyway.

Quoted:
Next: ARFCOMMER's homes will burn because the authorities claim their homes are "weapons factories"

Then they burn the "evidence" before trial.

Quoted:


Burning is when you completely run out of options, LEO does not like to do it because you lose evidence, treehugger types don't like it because many of the chems used in explosive production is quite toxic, fire fighters don't like it because of the risk of fire spreading especially with the risk of a low order or high order explosions sends burning material hundreds of feet.

There is room at a Hazardous Devices at Redstone that is a replica of the living room of a bomber during the 60's.  Let me tell you, it would kill over 90% of Military EOD with ease.  The whole fucking place was one big booby trap, step on a rug - your dead, sit in a chair - your dead, bump a stool - your dead.   That house had to be burned, it just wasn't safe to be left.  The FBI only needed a booby trap or two for evidence to get a conviction.  IIRC, one of the old EOD techs at Hazardous devices cleared that one room IIRC, the guy was a legend in the Army community, he passed a few years ago.

Quoted:


Burning is when you completely run out of options, LEO does not like to do it because you lose evidence, treehugger types don't like it because many of the chems used in explosive production is quite toxic, fire fighters don't like it because of the risk of fire spreading especially with the risk of a low order or high order explosions sends burning material hundreds of feet.

There is room at a Hazardous Devices at Redstone that is a replica of the living room of a bomber during the 60's.  Let me tell you, it would kill over 90% of Military EOD with ease.  The whole fucking place was one big booby trap, step on a rug - your dead, sit in a chair - your dead, bump a stool - your dead.   That house had to be burned, it just wasn't safe to be left.  The FBI only needed a booby trap or two for evidence to get a conviction.  IIRC, one of the old EOD techs at Hazardous devices cleared that one room IIRC, the guy was a legend in the Army community, he passed a few years ago.

Quoted:



Was this place booby trapped? Ive not seen booby trap mentioned at all.

Quoted:



Was this place booby trapped? Ive not seen booby trap mentioned at all.

Quoted:



Was this place booby trapped? Ive not seen booby trap mentioned at all.

Quoted:




Whats the story behind this?

Were there any deaths?

Quoted:
The owner, Michele Holt, paid $479,000 for the house in March 2005.

She's SOL.  Government is not obligated to pay for it, and there's no way her insurance is going to eat it.  She has about $450 K in mortgage debt on the place.

She'll probably have to declare bankruptcy.  Or she could call up her lender and say "I'm walking away from this.  Go ahead and foreclose."

Quoted:

The owner, Michele Holt, paid $479,000 for the house in March 2005.



She's SOL.  Government is not obligated to pay for it, and there's no way her insurance is going to eat it.  She has about $450 K in mortgage debt on the place.



She'll probably have to declare bankruptcy.  Or she could call up her lender and say "I'm walking away from this.  Go ahead and foreclose."

Quoted:


The loss of the house is the least of the crap the property owner faces.

Wait till she gets the bill for the hazmat cleanup of the property. In addition she will probably face numerous lawsuits from the neighbors at least one person stuck in the resulting traffic, and possibly a bill from the city for the whole operation.

Interesting how once again a law designed to prosecute bad guys (slum lords, owners of crack houses and the like) winds up being used against a completely innocent property owner.