The exact origin and cause of the fire that took the life of 82-year-old Roy Williams remain undetermined in Camilla, Georgia

JULY 18, 2018

CAMILLA, GA — 

A fatal fire in Camilla Tuesday afternoon claimed the life of 82-year-old Roy Williams. According to Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner Ralph Hudgens, fire investigators are not able to determine the fire’s cause.

The fire broke out around 2:45 p.m. on the 3800 block of Drewery Road. Williams was bedridden, and an autopsy performed Wednesday morning by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation found that he died of smoke inhalation.

Hudgens said investigators from his office worked the fire scene with the Mitchell County Sheriff’s Office and the GBI. Due to the extensive damage the fire caused to the structure, Hudgens said the exact origin and cause of the blaze remain undetermined.
 

The home prior to the fire

===============================

MITCHELL CO., GA (WALB) - 

One person is dead after a house fire just south of Camilla on Drewery Road in Mitchell County.

According to the Mitchell County Coroner's Office, Roy Williams Sr., 85, died after the home he lived in caught fire Tuesday afternoon.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation will determine if an autopsy needs to be done as it works to determine the cause of death, according to the coroner's office.

Crews received the call around 2:45 p.m.

Mitchell County and Camilla fire crews responded to the scene.

The state fire marshal investigator is working to determine the cause of the fire.


Fire Chief Jamie Sullivan said that when crews arrived they tried to get Williams out of the house but were unable to.

He was bedridden and couldn't move.

Sullivan explained this is a good time to remind people to make sure they have working smoke detectors in their home.

"Fast notification. If you are not in the room where the fire may start, you can get notified of the fire quick to get out. The elderly gentlemen was bed riden and didn't have enough advance notice to get out of the house for the fire," said Sullivan.

On rare occasions, mulch can spontaneously burst into flames or cause structural or electrical material to ignite

This is so scary. This was the result of my friends black mulch (that she had just put down on July 4). Fire dept said it was spontaneous combustion from the heat. (This side of her house gets the hot afternoon sun). Black mulch is dyed by way of a chemical. The morning dew and the hot sun set the mulch on fire. Her neighbor was doing dishes and noticed it out their window. Ran over and put it out with the garden hose. Praise God they were in the right spot at the right time or this could have been a whole lot worse.
Did black mulch spontaneously combust, causing Medina house fire?
A Facebook post shared nearly 90,000 times says a Medina home caught on fire due to spontaneous combustion. We consulted experts to verify this claim.






Author: Brandon Simmons

 July 18, 2018

MEDINA, OH – There’s been much debate on Facebook regarding a post where a user claims her neighbor's home caught fire due to spontaneous combustion.

Fortunately, the damage wasn’t too serious, and no one was hurt. But could black mulch really be the cause?

The post has been shared nearly 90,000 times and has over 11,000 comments, with many offering their opinion about what really happened.

We went Medina Fire Chief Bob Painter for answers.

“When they did the investigation, it seemed like it started from the mulch area,” said Painter.

While it started in the mulch, he didn’t say the mulch spontaneously combusted.

“The natural decomposing process generates heat. And if it’s the right moisture, the right heat, and it gets enough wind, it could self-combust,” he said.

Before you jump to conclusions, he added this statement, “I really can’t remember any that weren’t started by cigarette butts or they get mulch too close to electrical decorations and that catches it when it’s dried out.”

Mulch has the ability to spontaneously combust. This typically happens when it’s piled many feet high at manufacturing facilities. Workers rotate and move the mulch using bulldozers to prevent it from igniting in flames.

Painter says it’s much harder for this to happen at your home.

“If you do the normal 2-4 inches like they recommend, you should have no problems. If you start getting 6-8 inches deep, you could have some spontaneous combustion.”

Mulch CAN spontaneously combust. But that’s probably not the case in this situation.

===============================
Can mulch spontaneously combust, set houses on fire?


Mulch can spontaneously burst into flames on rare occasions, experts say

July 18, 2018


Carla Field
Digital Managing Editor


 

File photo SOURCE: File photo, Assistant Fire Marshal Mike Hughes, Johnson City Fire Department
GREENVILLE, S.C. —

An image posted on an Upstate Facebook page Tuesday showing a house fire caused by the spontaneous combustion of landscaping mulch has led to a lot of questions and some very harsh comments.

The picture, repeatedly shared and heavily commented upon, was first posted July 14 by a woman in Medina, Ohio. A similar photo from a different incident is posted above.


The picture shows aluminum siding burned and melted off part of a garage above a landscaped area covered with black mulch.

The post said, “This is so scary. This was the result of my friend’s black mulch, that she had just pit down on July 4. (The) fire department said it was spontaneous combustion from the heat. This side of her house gets the hot afternoon sun.

“Black mulch is dyed by way of a chemical. The morning dew and hot sun set the mulch on fire. Her neighbor was doing dishes and noticed it out their window, ran over and put it out with the garden house. Praise God they were in the right spot at the right time, or this could have been a lot worse.”

Many people on Facebook questioned whether mulch can spontaneously catch fire, or they blamed the fire on an electrical receptacle in the burned area of the garage.

So, is there evidence or expert opinions to back up what the poster of the picture claimed?

Science, technology and news site RedOrbit.com, based in Nashville, Tenn., reported on the spontaneous combustion of mulch in August 2007, after wood chips on an Arlington, Texas playground burst into flames.

School officials said 99 degree temperatures caused the mulch to spontaneously combust.

A house fire in an upscale Chicago subdivision in 2007 was also blamed on mulch that spontaneously combusted. The fire did $175,000 worth of damage.

Thousands of mulch fires are reported annually in every state, Mark Finucane, with the Johnson City, Tennessee fire department, wrote on FireEngineering.com.

Finucane wrote, “Our department is frequently called out to extinguish smoldering fires in bark mulch. Often, this burning mulch is up against the side of a residential or commercial structure, where it is likely to be unnoticed. This burning/smoldering mulch may eventually ignite the underneath of the siding and then spread into the structural components of the building and cause extensive damage.”

He said one of the mulch fires his department responded to in April 2005 was at a Ramada Hotel.

“The first-arriving company observed smoke issuing from the roofline of a two-story hotel building of ordinary construction. On further investigation, personnel discovered that the synthetic stucco exterior wall of a support column was turning brown,” Finucane wrote. “Fire had charred the interior wood frame of the column and was starting to extend into the void space under the roof. The deep and extensive charring indicated the fire had been ‘working’ for an extended period.”

Johnson City firefighters also responded in March 2007 to a house fire that started in landscaping mulch that was placed up against an exterior wall. The fire did $8,000 worth of damage to the home.

SafetyInsurance.com says any mulch that is piled too deeply, more than just a few inches, can build up heat and spontaneously catch fire. Mulch fires start more readily when the weather is hot and it has been dry for an extended time. Factors such as below-average rainfall, dry conditions, warm temperatures and high winds increase the risk of mulch fires.

Alan Perkins, Washington, Ohio, fire marshal, says there are precautions to take to minimize the risk of mulch fires:

Use non-combustible mulch, such as rock or pea gravel, around the gas meter and next to combustible portions of a structure.
Maintain mulch at a depth of 2 to 4 inches to eliminate the chance of spontaneous combustion.
Maintain a minimum of a 6 inches of clearance between landscaping mulch beds and other combustible items such as buildings, shrubs, etc.
Do not discard cigarettes or other smoking materials on the ground or throw them out of your vehicle.
Stir and wet down mulch during extremely hot and dry conditions.
Ensure proper clearance to electrical devices, such as decorative lighting, by following the manufacturer’s instructions.

THE CORRUPT NEW JERSEY COURTS: MAKING MONEY ON THE BACKS OF RESIDENTS A PRIORITY OVER IMPARTIAL JUSTICE

Municipal Courts too Quick to Levy Fines and Need Major Reforms — Report

Colleen O'Dea | July 18, 2018

New Jersey’s 515 municipal courts collected over $400 million last year. New report concludes system is due for an overhaul that prioritizes impartial justice over making money

Credit: Creative Commons

The New Jersey Supreme Court is recommending significant changes in the state’s municipal courts to ensure their fairness and independence that will likely result in lower penalties for those that appear before municipal judges but will impact municipal budgets. Courts were ordered yesterday to begin implementing one change: lower fines for some penalties.

The Supreme Court document, called The Report of the Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Court Operations, Fines, and Fees, seeks to restructure a system that many have complained prioritizes generating revenues over carrying out impartial justice. The problem has a serious impact on the indigent, as defendants originally cited for something as minor as littering can end up with jail time due to the imposition of multiple fees and fines. Also, given that municipal judges are politically appointed, they may fear they will lose their jobs if they don’t levy enough fees to satisfy local officials. 

Municipal courts in New Jersey collected more than $400 million last year, retaining more than half that for local budgets. 

Supreme Court Chief Justice Stuart Rabner charged a special committee, formed 16 months ago, with examining complaints about the municipal courts. The committee found “a number of significant concerns where aggressive reform is needed.” Its report, which spans 74 pages but balloons to more than 1,300 with appendices, recommends 49 reforms that follow eight principles, including that “The Municipal Courts, as part of the Judiciary, are separate from the Legislative and Executive branches and are not a revenue-generating arm of the government.”

Putting cap on fines

Supreme Court Chief Justice Stuart Rabner

In an order issued in conjunction with the recommendations, Rabner placed caps on both the amount and number of fines municipal judges can impose on a person for failure to appear and for failure to pay fines. Currently, municipal judges have full discretion in imposing financial sanctions. The new order, which takes effect September 1, sets maximum caps for failure to appear in court ranging from $25 for parking violations to $100 for disorderly persons and other serious municipal offenses and limits the number of sanctions to one per case. It also caps the maximum fine for failure to pay court-ordered fees at $50, but a person who is unable to pay his fees can argue that to avoid an additional failure to pay monetary penalty. 

  Advocates praised the report and Rabner’s order as important initial steps toward making the municipal court system fairer. 

“We know municipal court abuses have disproportionately affected people with low incomes and people of color,” said Jeanne LoCicero, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, adding these courts can “prioritize revenue over justice.” Because municipal officials have a lot of control over local courts — mayors and councils appoint the judges to three-year terms — “there are political pressures involved and a person can have widely different experiences from municipality to municipality.”

Patricia McKernan, the chief operating officer of Volunteers of America Delaware Valley who recently researched the role of money in municipal courts and issues related to criminal justice debt as part of her work on her doctorate in social work, praised the report’s recommendations. “I think it is a step in the right direction to see the Supreme Court making these kinds of changes,” she said. “They are long overdue.”

This is not the first time that issues involving municipal courts have come to light. They were initially brought up as part of a 2014 review by the New Jersey Bar Association of judicial independence. Last September, the bar’s Subcommittee on Judicial Independence in the Municipal Courts released a report covering similar ground to that of the judiciary report released yesterday.

Municipal budgetary pressures

“The pressures of budgetary needs of the municipality and the local governing body, and the overall need for revenue to be generated along with a pervasive bias towards the police, cannot continue to be the focus of the municipal courts and of judicial appointments in the municipal court,” the NJBA report noted.

Not all agreed with the criticism. In a statement, the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, defended the work of municipal court personnel and noted that some of the money from fees and fines goes to support the state court system, as well. “Municipal judges, prosecutors, public defenders and court administrators take their offices seriously and exercise their duties ethically and responsibly. All undergo training before taking office. All work under the jurisdiction and are audited by of the Administrative Office of the Courts … Further we hope all recognize the value local elected officials place on the efficient and effective administration of justice at the local level and the support — financial and otherwise — provided to the State Judiciary.”

The intertwining of justice with revenues is not a problem unique to New Jersey. In 2015, as a result of the shooting death of an unarmed black man in Ferguson, Missouri by a white police officer, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a report that found the issuance of excessive fines, the use of arrest warrants to compel people to pay court-imposed fees and the jailing of people who missed payments.

When a person winds up in court, it’s most likely to be in municipal court. New Jersey’s 515 municipal courts — some towns share a court or have formed joint courts — handle traffic offenses, disorderly persons and petty disorderly persons offenses, and violations of municipal ordinances. They also handle instances of domestic violence and some housing matters. This is why it is critically important that these courts be fair, Rabner said in a statement.

Rabner: They must adhere to ‘Judiciary’s high standards’

“It is often said that municipal courts, which handle millions of cases every year, are the face of the Judiciary,” he said. “We must make sure that they adhere to the Judiciary’s high standards of integrity, independence, and fairness. As part of that effort, courts are responsible to see that justice is carried out without regard to any outside pressures.”

Rabner had written a letter to all judges, both municipal and in the Superior Court, last April that anticipated the report released yesterday. In it, he discussed “disturbing practices” of two municipal court judges. In one case, a judge had diverted fines in a way that gave more money to the municipalities where he served. The other was a judge who sentenced a man to five days in jail for the inability to pay a $239 fine for littering.
“The imposition of punishment should in no way be linked to a town's need for revenue,” Rabner wrote. “And defendants may not be jailed because they are too poor to pay court-ordered financial obligations.”

'Devastating to individuals and families'

The major concerns voiced by the report are over three “excessive” practices:

• The imposition of fines beyond those associated with the original violation. These “ultimately have little to do with the fair administration of justice” and can start “an ongoing cycle of court involvement for defendants with limited resources.”
• The use of bench warrants and license suspensions “as collection mechanisms.” Currently 2.5 million bench warrants for failure to appear in court and failure to pay fees are outstanding, with some dating back to the mid-1980s. These, too, can “be devastating to individuals and families.”
• The use of discretionary contempt assessments, with all amounts collected going to municipalities. From 2015 through 2017, $22 million in contempt fines were levied. Sometimes, these assessments “have more to do with generating revenue than the fair administration of justice.”

Fines that ‘have little to do’ with justice

“The committee was deeply concerned about what can be a never-ending imposition of mandatory financial obligations that have little to do with the fair administration of justice,” said Atlantic County Assignment Judge Julio Mendez, who chaired the committee. “They can be financially overwhelming, can disproportionately impact the poor, and often become the starting point for an ongoing cycle of court involvement for individuals with limited resources.”

The report recommends that the judiciary begin monitoring the imposition of fines for contempt of court — typically failing to obey the court or being disrespectful in court — to ensure that such fines are justified. It also suggested the development of sentencing guidelines for discretionary penalties and the mandatory scheduling of an ability-to-pay hearing upon a defendant’s nonpayment of fines. (Scroll to the end of this story for a table that shows Contempt of Court Assessments in all 21 counties.)

Another set of suggestions, some of which would require legislative approval, seek to improve judicial independence. Among these are the creation of transparent and impartial appointment and reappointment processes for judges, increasing judges’ terms to five years.

“Establishing a uniform and transparent judicial appointment process will elevate the experience of the public, who can come to court to have their case resolved knowing local politics and financial pressures are not driving the judicial process,” said John E. Keefe Jr., president of the state bar, in support of the judicial recommendations and the entire report.

Controversial recommendation

A final, and likely very controversial recommendation, is for the mandatory consolidation of courts, particularly of smaller courts, which may meet only once or twice a month and have fewer than 1,000 filings a year. 

The report also calls for the creation of a working group of members of all three branches of government to implement the reforms and tackle other relevant issues.

So far, officials have signaled a willingness to work on court reform.

“Governor Murphy applauds the New Jersey Supreme Court’s willingness to take a hard look at our municipal court system and propose reforms with the goal of making the system fairer for all,” said Murphy spokesman Dan Bryan. “As a candidate, the Governor noted the need to ensure that municipalities do not excessively rely on municipal fines, which can disproportionately impact poorer residents.”

A spokesman for the Senate Democrats agreed. “This is a significant report with findings and recommendations that we are taking seriously,” said Richard McGrath. “The principles of justice and fairness that we followed in making the historic reforms to the bail system that became a national model will guide us in making any reforms to municipal courts. The emphasis of the legal process should be on the fair administration of justice that does not punish anyone unfairly simply because they do not have the ability to pay.”

‘Policing for profit’

The Republicans support the report as well. Sen. Declan O’Scanlon (R-Monmouth), offered to sponsor several of the recommendations.

Sen. Declan O'Scanlon (R-Monmouth)

“Policing for profit has become the norm for too many municipalities. It has become so accepted that many local officials don’t believe they’re doing anything wrong,” he said. “When considering the hiring of judges there is open discussion of how aggressive candidates will be in generating revenue. That perverts our justice system and damages peoples’ faith and trust in our police ... Our overarching goal should be the greatest amount of compliance and safety with the LEAST amount of punishment.”

O’Scanlon predicted at least some of the reforms will be unpopular with municipal officials and indeed the municipalities’ representative on the court committee did not support it.

The league said that while it commends the work of the committee, “Unfortunately, the report draws many of its conclusions based on anecdotal accounts, including those from other states and the recommendations do not address the impact of state-imposed mandates and requirements.” It said that of the $400 million in fees collected in 2017 “nearly half these funds are a direct result of State surcharges to fund state priorities. While the report itself notes the negative impact of these State mandated charges on indigent defendants, not one of the Committee’s recommendations aim to address this burden.”

Michael Cerra, the league’s assistant executive director, noted that municipalities pay all the costs of local courts. “It comes from the municipal budget,” he said. “Court fees are used to offset the costs but they don’t come close to covering all costs. You couldn’t run a municipal court off of court fees alone.”

On the other hand, neither LoCicero nor McKernan believe the recommendations go far enough. For instance, McKernan said one of the challenges many people face is getting legal representation and the report does nothing to address that.

“Folks who don’t have the resources to hire an attorney are forced to make an application and pay a fee for a public defender. That can be problematic for them,” McKernan said, adding the application fee can be as high as $200.

The judiciary is seeking public comment on its report through September 17.

Contempt of Court Assessments

County	All filings	Contempt cases	Percent contempt	Contempt fines	Average fine per case
ATLANTIC	431,904	13,876	3.2	$820,128	$59.10
BERGEN	,844,873	37,912	2.1	$1,195,063	$31.52
BURLINGTON	615,522	27,995	4.5	$3,084,351	$110.18
CAMDEN	1,025,586	16,175	1.6	$2,370,281	$146.54
CAPE MAY	228,856	3,403	1.5	$83,976	$24.68
CUMBERLAND	218,832	3,805	1.7	$304,903	$80.13
ESSEX	2,815,726	30,879	1.1	$1,782,119	$57.71
GLOUCESTER	388,380	13,563	3.5	$967,425	$71.33
HUDSON	3,192,739	35,061	1.1	$862,449	$24.60
HUNTERDON	171,704	1,311	0.8	$128,025	$97.65
MERCER	617,006	17,535	2.8	$1,648,769	$94.03
MIDDLESEX	1,236,913	31,159	2.5	$2,230,988	$71.60
MONMOUTH	1,025,416	32,497	3.2	$2,640,803	$81.26
MORRIS	622,471	13,558	2.2	$1,203,320	$88.75
OCEAN	537,752	6,178	1.1	$590,347	$95.56
PASSAIC	995,090	23,123	2.3	$771,794	$33.38
SALEM	78,050	1,598	2.0	$93,265	$58.36
SOMERSET	340,707	3,041	0.9	$199,461	$65.59
SUSSEX	94,414	2,284	2.4	$160,456	$70.25
UNION	1,151,302	18,828	1.6	$1,044,450	$55.47
WARREN	135,324	3,169	2.3	$139,932	$44.16
NEW JERSEY	12,048,917	336,950	2.8	$22,322,304	$66.25

Source: Report of the Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Court Operations, Fines, and Fees

=====================

 JUDICIAL CORRUPTION AND ABUSE OF LAWS

I have been reading your stories regarding local courts that must stop shaking N.J. residents down for cash.

I must inform you that these practices are not limited to the municipal courts.  They are widespread in the superior courts, the Chancery (or general equity) divisions that handle tax sale foreclosures.  They threaten people with forfeiting their homes and with eviction if they fail to pay taxes that may not even owe.

In my case, they stole my homestead property and place of business that was valued at $475,000 for a property tax of $20,000.  The property was over-assessed by more than 40 percent and they knew it, but they confiscated my home, anyway.  Tragic, tragic, situation.  

The Passaic County sheriff then filed criminal charges against me for refusing to leave my home and they claimed they were assaulted.  The criminal case is pending for 7 years and 1 month now.  It has not gone to trial because of the massive corruption in the judicial system.  Although assault case must be brought to trial within 1 to 2 years, it has been more than 7 years now.  A defendant has a fundamental constitutional right to a speedy trial.  U.S. Const., amend.VI; N.J. Const. Art. I, ¶ 10.  But the state judiciary violated that right.

They also violated my constitutional rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment and Article I, par. 20 of the state constitution that prohibit private takings;  no state court had jurisdiction or authority to take a $475,000 homestead property belonging in full to Dr. Stephanatos and deliver it to a third party (American Tax Funding, LLC).  But these corrupt judges did it anyway.

PRIVATE TAKINGS ARE PROHIBITED BY BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTIONS; AS A RESULT, THE CHANCERY COURT EXCEEDED ITS CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY AND ITS JUDGMENT WAS VOID AB INITIO

 

We provide the following two precedential New Jersey cases where the courts have ruled that an act of the legislature cannot confer any right upon an individual to deprive persons of the ordinary enjoyment of their property without just compensation.  Here are the two seminal cases:

An act of the legislature cannot confer any right upon an individual to deprive persons of the ordinary enjoyment of their property without just compensation. Oechsle v. Ruhl, 140 N.J. Eq. 355, 54 A.2d 462 (Ch.1947). Constitutional Law.

An act of the legislature cannot confer upon individuals or private corporations, acting primarily for their own profit, although for public benefit as well, any right to deprive persons of the ordinary enjoyment of their property, except upon condition that just compensation be first made to the owners. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Angel, 41 N.J. Eq. 316, 7 A. 432, 56 Am.Rep. 1 (1886).

See also the following federal law, prohibiting private takings:

The Public Use Clause provides that “one person's property may not be taken for the benefit of another private person without a justifying public purpose, even though compensation is paid.” Hawaii Hous. Auth. v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229, 241 (1984) (quoting Thompson v. Consol. Gas Corp., 300 U.S. 55, 80 (1937). Because a private taking cannot be constitutional even if compensated, “[a] plaintiff that proves that a government entity has taken its property for a private, not a public, use is entitled to an injunction against the unconstitutional taking, not simply compensation.” Carole Media LLC v. N.J. Transit Corp., 550 F.3d 302, 308 (3d Cir. 2008).

 

They also violated the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures (see also Article I, Paragraph 7 of the New Jersey Constitution).  They seized and confiscated a residential property valued at $475,000 (plus his business as well) for a small amount of disputed taxes.  These are truly criminal acts.

If you can listen and publish my story, you will be shocked of what these judges have been doing to shake people up for money.  They essentially blackmailing them: you either pay, or you lose your home;  you either pay or we put you to jail; you either pay or we take your license away,  and so on.

Here is a link, if you want to learn more about this case.   You will be really-really-really shocked regarding what they have done to me.

http://metroforensics.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-dishonesty-of-new-jersey-judges.html

See also the corruption tip regarding Ronald Lucas who defrauded the police and firemen fund by claiming on the job disability.

http://metroforensics.blogspot.com/2018/06/corruption-tip-passaic-county-sheriffs.html

 
We have evidence that Dr. Stephanatos was targeted by the government employees because he had filed lawsuits asking for equal protection regarding his excessive property taxes.  That is why they violated the constitution and confiscated his property for taxes that he did not even owe.  These are absolutely unethical and even criminal acts.