Teen Faces Charges
In 76-Year-Old's Fireworks Death

2004 -- A 16-year-old boy is now charged with involuntary manslaughter in a fireworks incident that led to the death of a 76-year-old woman.

A spokesman says Cook County prosecutors decided not to charge the teen as an adult but they upgraded the charges against him. The teen was originally charged with aggravated arson.

Police say he lit some fireworks on July 3 and slipped them through the mail slot of a womanss home in the south Chicago suburb of Calumet City.

The firecrackers started a fire that critically injured the woman.  She died 11 days later.

The teen is scheduled to be in court on Sept. 24.

$420,000 in settlements
Parents settle fireworks injury suits

2004 -- A Boca Raton boy blinded in one eye by a bottle rocket during a Fourth of July party has won $420,000 in settlements for his injuries.

The July 4, 2002, accident left the boy then 12, blind in his left eye, according to a lawsuit filed in 2003 by his parents.

The parents sued the party hosts as well as the parents of the boy who fired the rocket that hit their son. The settlements were filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court in December.

The parents claimed that the party hosts were negligent for encouraging guests to bring fireworks to their home in Winding Lakes.

At least 15 of the guests were under 18 years of age and some as young as 8, the lawsuit said. The claim against the party hosts was settled for $120,000.

Another $300,000 settlement came from the insurance company of the other boy's parents, according to court records. The lawsuit claims the they failed to supervise their son's use of the fireworks.

 

Awarded $860,000

In 1991, a Palm Beach County jury awarded a 41-year-old Delray Beach woman $860,000 for a Roman candle fireworks that blew up in her face, blinding her in the left eye. That accident also occurred at a party in a private home.

$1 million Lawsuit

-- An 11-year-old boy and his father are suing the boy's mother for more than     $1 million after the child was injured in a fireworks accident.   The mother, "either directly or through negligent supervision," permitted him to play with high-powered fireworks, one of which blew up in his mouth.  The firework was of the "artillery shell" variety, the suit said, involving a round ball being dropped into a foot-long tube before blasting through the air.  But the firework "did propel into (his) mouth, where it further exploded," the court documents said.  "The explosion injured, among other things, his face, mouth, oral pharynx, esophagus and eye, and did further require the insertion of a tracheostomy and a gastrostomy tube for feeding.  The boy incurred a permanent impairment of his ability to earn wages (and) has been caused to suffer great mental, emotional and physical pain, strain and anguish, resulting in the loss of the enjoyment of his life," the suit states.  In the lawsuit, the boy and his father are demanding a jury trial, at
least $1 million in damages and, if needed, permission to bring a claim against
the defendants' home insurance providers.

State may be liable in fireworks deaths

-- The state of Ohio can be held liable for the deaths of nine people killed in a 1996 fire at a Lawrence County, Ohio, fireworks store, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.  In a 4-3 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that the state fire marshal is not protected as a government entity from being sued for negligence when carrying out a public duty.  The decision does not mean the state is immediately liable for the deaths at Ohio River Fireworks in Scottown, Ohio, on July 3, 1996. But it means the state can no longer use Ohio’s public duty doctrine as a defense.   Justice Deborah Cook, writing for the majority, said the Ohio Court of Claims must apply the same legal principles whether a defendant is a private or public individual or institution.  Because of that, allowing the state to use a defense in the Court of Claims only available to public entities would constitute "spurious logic," Cook wrote.  Justice Alice Robie Resnick dissented, saying the public duty doctrine is necessary to prevent governments from being overwhelmed by lawsuits.  A lawyer for family members of the nine killed in the fire, said the ruling will give his clients the hearing they deserve.   The justices "have in essence said the public duty doctrine is dead. "  "We have to look at each case on its facts and its merits."   A message was left with Attorney General’s office seeking    comment.   Lawyers for the families argued that the fire marshal’s office, conducting an undercover operation of illegal fireworks at the store three days before the fire, discovered the sprinkler system had been disabled but did nothing. Attorneys for the state argued that the families have never proved the store was violating safety regulations or that the sprinkler system was disabled the day of the fire. They also say the families didn’t prove they relied on the fire marshal to protect them.   A man, whose 14-year-old son was killed in the blaze, said he was happy with the court’s ruling.   "The state has taken too many things for granted," said one of several relatives of the victims who is suing the Ohio Department of Commerce’s fire marshal division. "A lot of times I think that if the state would have just closed the store up like they should have, this accident would have never happened."   A former Proctorville area resident, allegedly tossed a lit cigarette onto a shelf of fireworks inside Ohio River Fireworks, which was crowded with unsuspecting holiday shoppers. Estimates vary, but most agree 30 to 40 people were inside the store.   Some witnesses say the boy  who suffered a brain injury in a skateboarding accident when he was a child, was coaxed by three companions into playing a joke with the cigarette.    In a matter of seconds, the building, located about nine miles north of Proctorville, was engulfed with smoke and flames as customers searched for the only way out -- a 3 1/2-foot-wide front door.   The man,  who was in the fireworks store, said it will always be difficult to recall the tragic day and cope with the loss of his son, who would have been 21-years-old this year.   "I have good and bad days," he said. "I try to keep busy so I don’t think about it that much."   But when he does think about the accident, he wonders what the future would have held for his son, he said.   "Would he finish high school? Would he have gone on to Duke University? He always loved Duke basketball, and wanted to go to school there."    The boy  was arrested the day of the fire and charged with eight counts of involuntary manslaughter. A ninth victim died later. He was deemed incompetent to stand trial and is currently confined to a state psychiatric hospital in Athens, Ohio.    A Lawrence County Common Pleas Court judge ruled in March that he needs to remain there for up to two more years.   The owner of the Fireworks store had his fireworks license revoked shortly after the fire. Two years ago, he was caught selling fireworks and was sentenced to five months in jail.  An additional six months were added to his sentence because he didn’t show up at the jail on time to begin serving the first sentence.   He was released early from the jail in July 2001 for health reasons.

Teen not liable for girl's injury

-- A civil jury found a teenager not liable for a 1995 fireworks accident in which a city girl was blinded in one eye.   The jury did find that a second man  was liable for the girl's injury. He, however, settled out of court before the District Court trial.   The jury also found that the girl and her family suffered more than $47,000 in past medical expenses and could anticipate more than $570,000 in future costs.   The girl, a 17-year-old high school junior, was injured July 4, 1995, when she was struck in the eye by a bottle rocket launched from a hand-held tube. Trial testimony indicated that she held and pointed the plastic pipe while another person lit the firework's fuse.   A police report said the incident occurred while several youths were firing at one another with fireworks in vacant land.

Teen in court over firework 'gunfire'

-- A New Zealand student has appeared in court after his homemade fireworks sparked an armed police response.   Officers were called to a house in Whangarei  when neighbours mistook an 18-year-old's  home-made squibs for gunfire. The area was cordoned off.   He has appeared in court charged with unlawful possession of explosives.

Young man tried for fatal horse fire
faces 10 years in prison for arson

-- On a warm night in July 2001, Stephen Evola and his sister Jaclyn did what any young twenty-somethings would do when their parents left town — they had a party. The siblings invited a large group of friends to their home in Grosse Point, Mich., an affluent suburb of Detroit.

At around 4 a.m., the party started dying down and Stephen Fennell, 23, one of the few guests remaining, began to joke around about throwing a firework into a nearby horse barn. According to witnesses, he walked across the street between five to 10 minutes later and did just that, allegedly throwing a mortar toward the 91-year-old Grosse Pointe Hunt Club barn.     By the time daylight broke, the barn was burned to the ground and 19 horses were dead.      Nineteen horses were killed in the barn fire.      Stephen Fennell was tried for one count of arson and 19 counts of willfully and maliciously killing and/or torturing an animal. If convicted of arson, he faced up to 10 years behind bars.

Practical Joke Gone Bad

On the night of the fire, The Hunt Club's night watchman, Ray Neal, heard a "Voop" sound and though he didn't see anything, prosecutors claim it was the firework that Fennell threw on the barn's roof. A short time later, a raging fire broke out. Neal risked his life to save five horses, but for the rest it was too late. Most were incinerated in the fire, but one, Bart, had to be put down the next day after he tried to jump through one of the barn's small windows and sustained severe chest trauma.     When Fennell and his friends saw the flames, they ran away and assembled in Evola's kitchen. One of the hosts, Jaclyn Evola, claims she wanted to call 911, but Fennell told her not to. They decided to lie to police and say they were all sleeping at the time of the fire. No one called 911.      Six of the horses that died in the blaze belonged to the riding school, but the rest belonged to individual owners who were shocked and upset when they heard the sad news. Many were dedicated horse enthusiasts and had planned to take their prized horses to the Hunt Club's biggest riding competition of the year, The Michigan Jumper Association Class B competition.     "We hope he is charged to the fullest extent of the law," Lisa Acho, manager of the Michigan Humane Society of Rochester Hills told the Detroit News. "Usually on the Fourth of July we see dogs running off scared from fireworks … not something this malicious."      The Hunt Club has sued Stephen Fennell, Joseph Evola and his parents for $1.25 million.

No Accident

Although Fennell may not have intended to set the fire, he did know the risks involved in throwing a firework into a barn full of horses and disregarded those risks, argued prosecutor Ken Simon. The state asserted that common sense should have told Fennell that throwing a firecracker in an old, wooden barn filled with flammables like hay was likely to cause a blaze. Fennell was also trying to scare the horses by setting off the fireworks which was, according to the prosecutor, mental torture.      The prosecution maintained the simple act of "scaring" the horses constitutes "mental" harm, and therefore should be considered torture.      Prosecutors called eyewitnesses from the party who testified seeing Fennell throw the firework at the barn.      As for prosecution experts, Dr. Patricia Loomis, a veterinarian specializing in equine medicine who was called to the scene of the fire, said loud noises, like the sound of a firework, would scare horses. Because a horse's natural instinct is to flee, and because all the horses in the barn were confined to stalls, a loud noise would panic them.     Electrical and a mechanical engineers also were on hand to testify the fire was not caused by either mechanical or electrical malfunctions.

Not His Fault

The defense set out to convince the jury that the fire was accidental and unintentional. Nobody, not Fennell or his friends, the Hunt Club, the police or the neighbors thought there was anything dangerous about the barn, they argued. In addition, Fennell never said he wanted to kill or harm the horses or set the barn on fire.     They also sought to poke holes in eyewitness testimony and contended there was no certainty that the firework caused the blaze.      As far as "mentally torturing" the horses with the fireworks, the defense maintained fireworks didn't disturb them.

Found Guilty
Sued for $1.25 million.

-- A trial that began with tears ended the same way, with a suburban Detroit man found guilty in mid-March of killing 19 horses when he threw a lit firecracker into a Hunt Club (Mich.).   Owners of the dead horses and those who work at the hunt club cried when the guilty verdict was read. Although they were disappointed that the man, 24, was found not guilty of arson, they were pleased the jury said he was guilty of 19 counts of willfully and maliciously killing the horses.    He faces up to four years in prison for each count and a $5,000 fine.  Sentencing guidelines, however, indicate that he will likely serve less than three years. Many of the horse owners were expected to speak at his sentencing hearing.

In the early morning hours of July 8, 2001, he and two friends were drinking at a friend’s home, across the street from the Hunt Club barn.  One of the friends testified that he and the others watched as the man shot fireworks into the air.  A short time later, while they were sitting around the kitchen table, someone in the group suggested scaring the horses with a firecracker.    The group walked across the street and the man lit and tossed a firecracker into the barn.  Minutes later, the barn burst into flames, but no one called the fire department.  Instead, they told police they were all asleep.   The man, the friend who hosted the party, and his parents have been sued by the club and its insurance carrier for $1.25 million.

The wooden barn at the 91-year-old club was a fixture in the community, bringing a little country feel to the suburban setting.   Many neighbors, while walking or bicycling, would stop to say hello to the horses as they poked their heads out their barn windows or watch the horses exercise in the adjacent field.  Plans are nearly complete for a new barn, but this one will be placed well away from the street.

The Verdict

Fennell was found not guilty of arson, but guilty of the animal cruelty charges. He was sentenced to one year in jail and three years of probation.

 

Man sues after home destroyed by fireworks

A man whose house was destroyed when it caught fire from two boys playing with fireworks has filed a lawsuit against the boys' fathers and the vendor where they bought the fireworks.

W. B. of Carlsbad filed a civil lawsuit in district court against M. O. of Roswell and W. S. of Carlsbad, fathers of the two teens who accidentally started the blaze outside B. two-story home.

Also named in the lawsuit are B., E. and A. A., owners of A. Fireworks, where the lawsuit said one of the boys, age 15, bought the fireworks.

Tony McGrady.

1990 -- Testimony at the Preliminary Inquiry revealed that Whites Road and Finch Avenue in the Town of Pickering are both four-lane main roads and that their intersection is controlled by traffic lights. Whites Road southbound is an access route to Highway 401 in Pickering. On May 20, 1990 Razmovski was driving a motor vehicle northbound on Whites Road approaching Finch Avenue and Plasko was alone in the back seat; there was another passenger in the front seat, but that passenger was not before the Court. Evidence indicated there were between three and five vehicles using both lanes northbound close behind the accused. An eastbound motorist on Finch Avenue observed Plasko hanging out of the back window of the Razmovski vehicle holding a firework. Flame was being emitted in all directions and the smoke was being blown ahead into the intersection, hampering visibility particularly for westbound drivers. Plasko pointed the barrel of the firework to the rear whereupon some sort of fireball shot out in a southerly direction, ricocheted off the header panel at the top of the grille of the closest car in the curb lane, struck the windshield of that vehicle and dispersed in a shower of sparks. I have no evidence before me of actual damage or injury to the car which was struck by whatever was emitted from the firecracker. Two spent fireworks were recovered by police.

It is a matter of fact whether actual danger to life resulted from Plasko's conduct in directing a fireball at the vehicle behind him. Mr. Ducharme argued that there was no threat to life and indeed that there was no evidence that the progress of the following vehicles was impeded by the action of the accused; it appears that they all left the scene. It is my view, however, that it is a permissible inference based on common sense, that an actual danger to life was created. Leaving aside the more speculative supposition of the consequences to a driver with a heart condition when a fireball explodes off his windshield, the greater danger arises from a possible motor vehicle accident. The information particularizes the potential victims as being the persons travelling in other moving vehicles in the direction where the accused was aiming the firework. In my view, actual danger to life could have arisen through a motor vehicle accident involving cars behind or beside the vehicle struck by the fireball. In my view, s. 430(5.1) does not require evidence that death was likely to ensue from the conduct, but rather only that the evidence disclose an actual danger to life. A motor vehicle accident on a main road can lead to death through a variety of impacts. In my view, it is not necessary to consider whether there would have been danger to life from a fireball ricocheting into an open car window, although such an event would certainly have been foreseeable.

 

Plea bargain hearing put off in fireworks case

2004 -- A hearing on a possible plea bargain for an El Monte husband and wife accused of having a record 15 tons of illegal fireworks was delayed Tuesday until July 22.

Judge Steven Sanora of Rio Hondo Superior Court in El Monte granted the postponement because one of their attorneys could not be present Tuesday.

They were arrested June 30 and are charged with one count each of possession of explosives without permission.

Police allegedly found a garage and van full of illegal fireworks at the couple's home.

The couple also allegedly had more than 600 cases of the unlawful pyrotechnics at a storage facility in Los Angeles.

The fireworks could have leveled a city block if exploded and had a street value of $500,000, police said.

Perthshire
Man jailed for fireworks attack

-- A jury had earlier found Donaldson guilty of trying to kill his wife.

A husband who tried to murder his wife with commercial-sized fireworks at a caravan park in Perthshire has been jailed for 12 years. Bryan Donaldson, from Baildon in Yorkshire, hatched the plot to get his hands on a £100,000 life insurance policy.

The 56-year-old businessman had earlier been found guilty of trying to kill his wife Margaret.

Judge Lord Hardie branded him a wicked and reckless man, motivated by greed.

Jurors had heard that Donaldson, who owned the caravan site near Crianlarich with his wife, trapped her in a cottage and set light to a large box of fireworks.

A seven-day trial at the High Court in Kilmarnock heard the couple had been married for 33 years but Donaldson had begun an affair with a 22-year-old woman.

His wife suffered more than 30 injuries in the attack 15 months ago.

I am pleased justice has been done and I am now looking to rebuild my life

Margaret Donaldson Lord Hardie added that Donaldson, originally from Ilkley near Leeds, had shown no remorse and that the attempted murder had been premeditated and planned over a period of time.

He said: "You induced your wife to take out a life insurance policy under a false pretence. Whatever your ultimate motive was you planned the death of your wife and bought the fireworks as a result.

"You ordered more fireworks than usual at that time of year and induced your wife to go with you to the cottage and attempted to murder her."

Outside the court, Mrs Donaldson said: "I am pleased justice has been done and I am now looking to rebuild my life.

"My children have been wonderful in the way they have supported me. I dread to think what it has done to them."

 

FIREWORKS HUBBY'S SICK DIVORCE BID
£50k demand

-- A HUSBAND who tried to murder his wife with a box of giant fireworks wants her to pay him £50,000.

Bryan Donaldson claims he is due the cash as part of a divorce settlement.

Donaldson was jailed for 12 years in December 2004 for trying to kill his wife Margaret.

After the case, Margaret tried to re-build her life and began divorce proceedings at Perth Sheriff Court.

But Donaldson filed a counter claim, demanding cash he claims he is due from their joint assets.

Yesterday, Margaret, who still has nightmares about her husband's plot to kill her, said: "I feel like he is still beating me with a stick.

"The court case was terrible. Now, I'm back to square one."

Donaldson's trial at the High Court in Forfar heard how he tried to kill Margaret in October 2003 and get his hands on her £100,000 life insurance policy.

He lured her to a remote cottage, pushed her towards a fire, then lit a box of display fireworks, leaving her badly injured.

Caravan The caravan park which the couple ran in Luib, Perthshire, was sold last year for £700,000.

Margaret, 57, is seeking a settlement of £250,000.

Donaldson, 57, has told Perth Sheriff Court his demand for £50,000 "is reasonable in all the circumstances".

But Margaret said: "I have been left with nothing. He won't accept any blame for what he has done. He was always very greedy."

Donaldson is currently living in Yorkshire with a girlfriend after being released from Shotts prison in September pending an appeal.

He refused to comment on the divorce case, which will be heard later