Dottleshead ★ Posted September 12, 2017 Share #1 Posted September 12, 2017 Heh. I couldn't resist. But it seems Idaho has the right idea. http://q13fox.com/2017/09/11/idaho-bills-parent-of-juvenile-84500-following-wildfire/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Kosciuszko Posted September 12, 2017 Share #2 Posted September 12, 2017 Idaho officials have sent an $84,500 bill to the parent of a juvenile after fire investigators determined the juvenile started a wildfire with mortar-style fireworks. Oregon State Police have identified a teenager they believe started the raging Eagle Creek Fire Well, do they know he started it and can prove it, or not? The article at first gives the impression authorities are certain, but later paragraphs the article says the authorities 'believe'. It would also be interesting to see what the Idaho law says about determining 'responsibility'. Does the person have to be convicted of starting the fire to be held 'responsible', or just indicted, or is just being under suspicion enough to levy the bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caretaker Posted September 12, 2017 Share #3 Posted September 12, 2017 I'd burn the bill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtyhip Posted September 12, 2017 Share #4 Posted September 12, 2017 50 minutes ago, Thaddeus Kosciuszko said: Idaho officials have sent an $84,500 bill to the parent of a juvenile after fire investigators determined the juvenile started a wildfire with mortar-style fireworks. Oregon State Police have identified a teenager they believe started the raging Eagle Creek Fire Well, do they know he started it and can prove it, or not? The article at first gives the impression authorities are certain, but later paragraphs the article says the authorities 'believe'. It would also be interesting to see what the Idaho law says about determining 'responsibility'. Does the person have to be convicted of starting the fire to be held 'responsible', or just indicted, or is just being under suspicion enough to levy the bill? Maybe it is careful wording because they have not been proven guilty in a court? Maybe such a hot button, that they fear the safety of the family or these kids, until the court decides their fate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parodybot Posted September 12, 2017 Share #5 Posted September 12, 2017 Is this him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kzoo Posted September 12, 2017 Share #6 Posted September 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, parodybot said: Is this him? Why does @Dirtyhip and the slick on her trainer come to mind? I hope she is safe. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur ★ Posted September 12, 2017 Share #7 Posted September 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Caretaker said: I'd burn the bill. I'd burn the kid. Witch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now