Comments on: Here-to-For Only Seen in Spy Movies - the Cyanide Capsule

By: NevadaMark

NevadaMark — Tue, 03 Jul 2012 20:43:37 +0000

I have no idea if it is still true, but there was a time that you could burn down your own house in Virginia. You had to have clear title, obviously. And you had to tell the fire department in advance so they could be there (presumably to protect the rest of the neighborhood). I have never heard of anyone actually doing this in the Old Dominion, but at least it was a recognition of your property rights. Are there any lawyers reading this blog who can give us a layman's definition of "arson of an occupied dwelling" and perhaps similar definitions of the other various classes of arson in Arizona?

By: Dale

Dale — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 22:50:55 +0000

I would be willing to bet that there is a clause in the insurance that says self-inflicted damage relieves the insurance company of any liability. As for the banks right to demand that it be built again I don’t think they would have any right. The insurance wasn’t in their name and was not being paid by them. I would bet that the bank is going to have to eat this one.

By: mark2

mark2 — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:48:40 +0000

@Matt, for your hypothesis to work, the man would also need to have the property free of bank loans. The property isn't his if it is owned by the bank.

If it is still owned by the bank, the bank has every right to demand that it be built up again.

By: Goober

Goober — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 18:13:11 +0000

No, they have to prove that he burned the house down himself, or hired someone else to burn it down before they can make a case for insurance fraud. And they wouldn't have to prove these things in order to determine that he was guilty of arson? Am I missing something here?

By: tomw

tomw — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 18:12:31 +0000

I *think* he has to file an insurance claim for it to be insurance fraud. If he doesn't file, and doesn't get insurance proceeds, it may not be fraudulent. The insurance company didn't lose anything, they gained a pile of premium payments with no payout. Seems to me, the mortgage holder might be concerned, and make the fraud accusation, as he did not do 'reasonable' stuff to protect their investment. Guess you may be required to carry insurance at the behest of the mortgage company, and they'd be the beneficiaries if the place burned down... Mental maze. tom

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 19:47:23 +0000

@Goober,

No, they have to prove that he burned the house down himself, or hired someone else to burn it down before they can make a case for insurance fraud. They would either have to charge insurance fraud and arson at the same time or convict him on the arson first.

By: elambend

elambend — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 14:15:47 +0000

@vic Kelley: my day is now grimmer for having read up on Lake and Ng, creepy

By: Craig

Craig — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 03:17:54 +0000

Russ, I think you are on to something. Maybe prosecutors should be allowed to offer a defendant three choices: a plea bargain, a trial date, or a cyanide pill.

By: Ariel

Ariel — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 01:20:52 +0000

Arson is arson, especially your own house because insurance fraud is only an EMT away. However, the charge of "arson on an occupied building" is how moronic prosecutors can go trying to get either a plea agreement or a jury conviction on any charge. He was the only occupant, and the real purpose of that law was for either arsonists not living there or arsonists who put others living there in danger. He was neither. Endangering the lives or properties of his neighbors at the Biltmore Estates, or endangering the lives of responders, I can see. If I had been on the jury, hearing that charge would have caused uncontrollable laughter or a sigh heard around the room. I'd likely be released by now.

By: Russ R.

Russ R. — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 11:13:41 +0000

We'll obviously have to wait until the post-mortem toxicology report to be certain of whether or not he poisoned himself, but assuming for now that he did... so what?

1. It's his life, he can end it whenever he wants.
2. He didn't harm anybody else in the process.
3. He saved the taxpayers of Arizona lots of money on his incarceration.