Sunny skies. Hot. High near 105F. Winds WSW at 5 to 10 mph..

Clear. Low 72F. Winds SSE at 5 to 10 mph.

VISALIA – A fire captain in charge of investigating the fire which destroyed the former Porterville Library on February, 18, 2020 took the witness stand for more than an hour on Friday during Day 3 of the Jurisdictional Hearing (trial) of the two youth who are charged with conspiracy, arson and manslaughter for starting the fire which killed Captain Ray Figueroa and Firefighter Patrick Jones.

The fire captain talked about the investigation he led, and of the various things it entailed, and of the findings of his investigation.

Starting with the front door, he said they worked their way in from the least-damaged areas of the library to the most-damaged areas. Along the way he and his team looked for charring and other fire-pattern indicators. The more charring there is, he said, the closer they get to the origin of the fire.

Pointing to photographs transmitted onto a screen by Attorney John Stinely, the investigator talked about the first photo submitted – one with damage caused by the collapsing of the roof and another area by the two large air-conditioning units which fell through causing damage.

The reference desk and computer lab did not have a lot of fire damage, he said.

In another photo, he pointed to an area showing the collapsed roof inside the library. However the roof had no charring and minimal sooting, he said, indicating the roof did not have fire pushing through that area.

“There was no charring or deposits on it, telling me that is not where the fire started,” he said.

In other areas, he pointed to areas where all the windows were gone but there was no charring on the counter top – giving the team direction to go towards as they looked for the origin of the fire.

As he moved through the photographs, each one showed more fire damage.

“In here, everything is disturbed,” he said and pointed to an area with a broken window. “At this point, we are still trying to determine (the origin.)”

He talked of the asphalt roof that moved across fast “like gasoline” and pointed to the area where the wall and roof collapsed.

“Just for reference,” he said, “The entire roof caved in. The whole roof collapsed.”

As he continued talking about the fire investigation, he pointed out smoke stains on the building in one photograph, and said the fire had a direction of south to north based on the smoke.

Other photographs showed bookshelves with no charring but small bubbles on the finish or laminate of the bookshelves caused by the cooled water poured on it during fire suppression.

He pointed to areas with rusting and said it was caused by “rapid oxidation” – rust which happens when a fire burning on metal is hit with cold water.

As they moved towards more rapid oxidation areas, they knew they were getting closer to the point of origin. During the process they ruled out an electrical start to the fire as there were no unexposed areas, “no arching and no beading” and said “None of the the wiring showed that.”

When they got to the staircase which had metal cabinets underneath, they saw rapid oxidation.

“You can start seeing a pattern,” he said. “The fire traveled through here.”

The last three photographs were taken of the same area – from far, nearer, and a close up – and showed a spring and flint for a lighter, and roller – which is what causes a spark, he said.

It was found five feet from the south wall on the west side of the library.

He then pointed to an area on the library map displayed on a screen as the area of the origin

“We did determine the cause to be intentionally set,” he said, saying nothing else in the area would have started it. “It was man-started.”

Tulare County Superior Court Judge Hugo Loza asked if it was started by a human being. The inspector answered “That is Correct.”

Attorney Richard Alvarez, representing one of the youth, talked about the structure and addition to the library in the 1950s and 1970s, respectively, and asked the investigator if he knew what was there prior to the library and said there is no way of knowing if things were discarded or dropped on the ground. He then asked about the fire inspector’s testimony on the spring and flint of the lighter, asking about a metal cover that was not found, which the fire inspector said there was so much water, it could have washed away. Alvarez then asked if water can move things around and move things in. “It could,” the fire inspector answered.

Attorney for the other youth, Megan Yanez then asked if it was turned over to Porterville Police Department and the fire inspector answered it was PPD who collected it and placed it into evidence.

Yanez then asked if any self contained breathing apparatus masks were found, and asked if Firefighter Patrick Jones’s mask was on his person and was he wearing it in an appropriate manner. She also asked how long the air would last. And whether is was above or below normal for the oxygen to only last 13 minutes.

Thirty minutes is standard, he said, but can be less in extreme situations, and that “Every fire and every situation is completely different,” said the fire inspector on the stand.

Yanez asked if the fire spread quickly because of the flammable equipment.

“Not flammable but combustible – wood and paper,” he said. “Flammable is gasoline” and mentioned again that the only thing in the area portion that was capable of causing a fire was the lighter. And when asked if all indicators lead to where the lighter was as the point of origin, he said “Yes.”

After leaving the witness stand, the next four witnesses consisted of the two mothers, and two teachers of the youth.

Both mothers, one after the other, were questioned by the prosecutor about teaching their children right from wrong, and at what age were they taught. One was asked about attending a Levantamiento, a Mexican festival where candles are used, but the mother answered when she went, she did not give the children candles.

The second mother was asked if she ever talked to her child about fires and whether she taught him to not use lighters.

“Were you scared of that man,” Alvarez asked referring to Stinely, and she said yes.

He asked if she was scared her would take her son away and she said yes, visible upset, and said last time they took him away from home for seven months. Alvarez asked again and again if she answered the prosecutor’s questions with what she thought he wanted to hear and asked more than once if one does not teach right from wrong, is that person a bad mother.

“I’m very confused. All this hurts me a lot,” she said through the interpreter and through tears. “I do everything I can for my kids.”

Alvarez asked the second mother if she was scared when police questioned them at her home and she said yes, because there were three of them and they were asking many things and her kids were crying. She said she was also upset because they took her son without a shirt and without shoes.

Stinely asked if the mother was lying to him earlier with her answers, changing it to asking if she was truthful with the police.

“I teach them about the right and wrong,” she said through the interpreter, and “Like I been trying to explain. I taught my son right from wrong.”

Stinely then asked her if she taught her son it was wrong to light fires. She answered yes before being dismissed.

The People then called on a teacher to take the stand. The English Language Arts instructor said she had (one youth) as an eighth grader in 2019-2020. She said he hardly ever broke any rules and that they had monthly fire drills. She also mentioned that the youth was reading at a third or fourth grade level but did follow and understand directions. But his Individualized Educational Plan did identify him as having a learning disability or being learning impaired.

The second teacher to take the stand, a science teacher at the youth’s middle school, was also asked about the same youth and said he followed directions “for the most part” but did have several disabilities and had an aide with him to remind him of what to do.

She also said there were no labs with Bunsen burners or flames, and only once entered class with horseplay, which was not allowed during lab. And that for the most part, understood right and wrong but there were “also times he had a blank stare.”

Stinely asked the science teacher if she ever talked to the parents about the one violation. She said no, she has 150 students and does not have time to call 150 parents.

Alvarez ended by saying the youth needed a lot of attention and had a special need for one-on-one assurance.

The Judge then called an end to the day and said more witnesses, including a teacher who would take the stand via Zoom, would be heard on Monday.

Sorry, there are no recent results for popular videos.

Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.