Firefighters and The Law

As a firefighter, I’ve occasionally encountered a homeowner or occupant who wasn’t happy about our presence or activities. The most recent was a fellow who lost it when we prepared to vent the roof of his home, and acted to interfere by attempting to climb the ladder and stop the truckies. He was tackled, handcuffed, and removed from the fireground by the police.

There was another individual who was a maintenance man at an apartment complex who had the habit of resetting the alarm panel prior to our arrival, such that we couldn’t determine if there was one faulty head, one bad zone, etc. and cite the complex for repair by their alarm services vendor. We asked, and then ordered him to leave the panel alone when an alarm activation took place. On strike three, he was removed by the PD for interfering with the operation of a fire department.

The only “crime” which is of interest to me is that of arson, as I’m the one who has to establish the basic cause and origin of the incident. Depending on the size of the fire, and whether or not a fatality accompanied the fire incident, I may summon the local, county, and/or state fire marshal, all of whom have law enforcement powers above that which the law confers upon me as incident commander, particularly the state FM, who is a specially trained state trooper.

That said, if I see evidence of illegal activity not connected with my reason to be on the property, a courtesy advisory is given to the PD, and they can choose to handle it as they wish. Examples would be: a grow op (fire hazard via overloaded wiring), a meth cook (oom waiting for a b). Otherwise, we don’t go rooting around in your home or business playing Jr. detective.

While we enjoy a measure of protection from lawsuit, we’re still tasked with adherence to nationally recognized standards, typically those promulgated by the NFPA. If we, as a department, or I, as IC, fail to maintain the operation in accord with those standards, that immunity becomes tenuous.

New word! “Fireground.” Thank you Cats.

So if the firefighters got overexcited and damaged my home more than was needed by their duties their actions would in fact be actionable? I did not know that. I presume the court would give the firefighters the benefit of the doubt in most cases.

Excessive damage, and also damage which was a direct result of an ineffective plan would be actionable IMHO. The sympathy of the court will likely weigh towards the fire company, but if the prosecution can show the FD failed to perform by the standard referenced, that’s the essence of your case.

This is also something we impress on n00bs-there’s no free ride anymore. Do it right, or don’t got on the truck.

[Slight hijack]
IANAL, I’m fairly sure there are laws against leaving potentially dangerous items (in this case I read Lion Traps as “set, unsafed booby traps”) in most locales. I’m too tired to look up other states’, but here’s Montana’s definition and law. Granted, that last one has the required intent of “committing a felony” with said ‘dangerous device’, but if you’re knowingly leaving these things set out for action on anyone that stumbles on 'em, that would qualify as an intent to assault. That’s why I don’t leave Claymore mines in my backyard for the gophers anymore. YMMV.
[/Slight hijack]

Tripler
. . . but I do set them out for the cows of Clovis.

I know that Lion Traps (like in the cartoons) are now outlawed as they are inhumane, but if I have them in my living room, fully set, but protected by a locked door and my legal expectation of privacy, a person entering does so at his own risk, right?

Certainly setting booby traps in a public place is illegal. Further, setting mantraps in a private place (in order to catch or kill an intruder) is on shaky ground morally and legally. But I keep my Lion Traps as a commemoration of great lion trappers in history, each with a little brass plaque and inscription.

That is OK, right? I need not keep my living room in pristine condition in the event a fireman might need to enter.

Of course all of this would be based upon my intent, and that is why we have juries.

What frequently happens is that a firefighter will enter a home and see something illegal. If it is a major offense then they will report it to the police who can easily get a search warrant (I assume because of the firefighter’s statement). Locally, a marijuana growing operation was exposed after the house caught fire and they are in jail. If you do a 'net search this is fairly common, apparently.

This is purely anecdotal, and I don’t have cites - my husband is a volunteer firefighter at a rural firehouse and I’ve heard lots of stories.
If they’re at a scene in an area with no hydrants, and the tanker runs out of water, they can put the hose in a homeowner’s or neighbor’s pool and pump that water out for use in putting out the fire. They’ve done it several times, and only once did a homeowner complain.

As you can see from this casestates approach the fireman’s rule differently. Were a fireman deemed a trespasser, then this case would help: “[T]respassers take the premises for better or for worse, as they find them, assuming the risk of injury from their condition, the owner being liable only for concealed spring guns, or other hidden traps intentionally put out to injure them, or any form of wilful illegal force used towards them.” (emphasis added).

But most courts treat firefighters as licensees–not trespassers.

Besides, most courts hold that even as to anticipated tresspassers, a landowner:

http://sv.biz.findlaw.com/legal/tort2.html

Instead of a plaque, how about a huge flashing sign that says: Caution–Dangerous Lion Traps–Do Not Enter.

Interesting.

Apparently that is the case in the UK. http://www.singleton.com/publications/fireloss/FireDepartmentLiability.pdf

and at least one US court (the US Court of Appelas for the 5th Circuit) has indicated that discretionary immunity may not apply where firefighters reportedly violated regulations or policies when attempting to control a fire.

Many states specifically grant immunity to volunteer fire departments. *E.g., *http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=nc&vol=2000/&invol=087-99-1
And rural fire departments (at least for taking too long to get to the fireground). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=nc&vol=appeals2003/&invol=030023-1

So I guess, the answer is, it depends.

Marijuana is an illegal substance regardless of whether its ownership is established or not. From a legal standpoint, what happened was the same as if the police found a bag of marijuna in the street or a marijuana plant growing in the wild. Even without knowing who owned the drugs, the police still have a right to seize them. Of course the owners can go to the police station and declare that they own the found property but by doing so they also make themselves liable for criminal charges due to that ownership.

You can’t protect people from themselves, I guess. A woman in my neighborhood was killed when she re-entered her burning house to retrieve her eye glasses.

I’m sure that there have been incidents where fierfighters overreact to a situation, especially given how much we rely on volunteers in this country. But I’m inclined to trust the experts when they have to make a quick decision in a dangerous situation.

On Christmas eve one year, I watched a firefighter knock down the heavy wooden front door of a neighbor’s house. There was smoke coming from the kitchen, and nobody knew if those folks were home. It turned out that they weren’t, but the house was heavily damaged, and I for one am glad that they didn’t hesitate when they thought that lives might be in danger.

Firefighter/Arson Investigator checking in…

The ubitquitous Exigent Circumstances rules trump your right to privacy every time. If your home is burning, and no one is there to tell us different, we’ll assume that the home is occupied, and take steps to effect a rescue, if it can be safely done.

First, it depends where you are. Second, we don’t have to seize it, we just have to let the Police know it’s there, the warrants aren’t our concern, the cops are covered by the Exigent Circumstances rules too.

Here again, it depends on where you are. Still, there are very few times when a residential structure fire is NOT a public danger, so it’s almost a moot question.

Criminally liable? No. Civilly liable? They COULD be. I doubt though that you’d be able to effectively sue, unless the actions were so reckless as to be evident to the layman (i.e. throwing a priceless vase through a window). Now if you kept loaded african lion traps around, and one of my crew got caught in one, trust me brother, a civil suit would be the LEAST of your problems.

Not if you keep them on the floor where it could be construed that you meant to trap a person. Keep them affixed to a wall, and you’d likely be in the clear (good luck with setting them though)

A friend of mine had the FD chop down the door from his back staicase to his roof (it was sort of porch) because the loft next to his had smoke coming out of it. It turned out they had a grease fire on the stove, which thye put out.

What if there had been evidence of a crime in my friend’s house, though?

As previously posted, we mention what we see to our friends in the PD and let them address it as they deem appropriate.

Once they are legally in, anything in plain view is fair game. The fact that it was a false alarm is irrelevant as long as the firefighters reasonably believed there was an emergency.

danceswithcats has provided us with excellent descriptions of what firefighters actually do, which is the best practice. Were they to enter your loft in search of a fire, find drugs, and seize them, it would not be a violation of your Fourth Amendment rights. But their seizure could result in chain of custody problems. OTOH, chain of custody is an evidentiary doctrine–not a constitutional one. Sometimes evidence is admissible despite a break in the chain of custody. http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/2001/001355-1.htm

Cf., http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ks&vol=supct/2003/20030418/&invol=86751 (search was unreasonable where officers were without fear for someone’s safety or a good faith belief that someone needed immediate aid and assistance); http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1263.01A (police officers entered yard in response to alarm, which turned out to be false. Entry was valid, but subsequent seizure of raccoon was not because the reasons justifying the seizure had terminated before the reentry).

How about a reality check here? (IANAL)
Case 1: No one but you ever goes into your bedroom. Thus no-one ever sees the traps.
Case 2: A friend is visiting and you forget to lock your commemorative lion trap room. Friend goes in and gets leg snapped off.
Case 3: Fireman goes in during fire and gets leg snapped off.

Case 1 - you’re home free.
Case 2 and 3? You’re going to be arrested for sure while they sort out the exact legality of it. Odds are good that in case 3 you will be at least initially charged with things like “Interfering with official acts”. If a fireman has a snapped off leg based on willful action by an individual, you will be charged with anything the cop on site can think of, whether it sticks or not. Police have a broad range of things that they can get away with charging and arresting people for that you would not normally think of.

Once charged with something, it will be an unfamiliar area of the law to your local police, judge, and jury, and everyone involved will be quite sympathetic to the victim. Your fate is very much up in the air. Whether or not it turns out to really and truly be illegal, you could spend years in jail on appeals. (If in case 2 your friend is a rapist child molestor, the jury may not be as apt to convict you.)

You almost certainly will be the defendant in a civil trial and will almost certainly lose that case.

Again, my searching skills are lacking, but here in the U.K. we have, ‘I could not help but notice…’ which is rather wider than ‘in plain view’.