There was definitely arson. The dogs detected accelerant in the hallway where the fire started and he admitted to having poured flammable cologne the there because he claimed his daughter liked the smell.
False.
He did not have a conformable alibi for the time the fire started and appears to have taken steps to prevent escape like blocking the door with furniture and breaking a window to help feed more oxygen. His behavior during the fire was of total disconcern until the firefighters showed up at which time he feigned hysterics. He quickly made a number of lavish purchases with the insurance money, bragged that he didn’t have to worry about money anymore, seemed far too worried about retrieving his valuables from the crime scene, and was heard whispering over his youngest kid’s casket that “you’re not the one who was supposed to die”.
He absolutely intended at least one of his children to die and was looking for a big payoff, and either deliberately started the fire or took advantage of an accident.
Did you read the cite? Every expert has said no arson. Fire investigator Gerald L. Hurst reviewed the case documents, including the trial transcriptions and an hour-long videotape of the aftermath of the fire scene. Hurst said in December 2004 that “There’s nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire. It was just a fire.”[7]
In June 2009, the State of Texas ordered a re-examination of the case. In August 2009, eighteen years after the fire and five years after Willingham’s execution, a report conducted by Dr. Craig Beyler, hired by the Texas Forensic Science Commission to review the case, found that “a finding of arson could not be sustained.” Beyler said key testimony from a fire marshal at Willingham’s trial was “hardly consistent with a scientific mind-set and is more characteristic of mystics or psychics.”[1][2]… An August 2009 Chicago Tribune investigative article concluded, “Over the past five years, the Willingham case has been reviewed by nine of the nation’s top fire scientists — first for the Tribune , then for the Innocence Project, and now for the commission. All concluded that the original investigators relied on outdated theories and folklore to justify the determination of arson.
People act weird when their family is dead. If the Police want you to be guilty, they will take however, you acted and sai it showed guilt .
The arsonist said there was arson, and he’d know better than the “experts”.
Even if we grant that he had a completely innocent motive for pouring flammible liquid in the hallway and it was just a complete coincidence that a fire started there 100% on its own and that he lied to his wife when he told her he started the fire, he would still have been deserving of the death penalty for his other actions that lead to the murder of his children.
Nor is there any evidence he pored flammable liquid.
Nor did he tell his wife he started the fire.
Yes, his wife claimed lots of stuff, but: Journalists familiar with the case noted that Stacy Kuykendall’s statement explicitly contradicted previous comments, legal testimony, and numerous published interviews before and after the execution.[35] This was also noted by Willingham’s prosecutor, who said, “It’s hard for me to make heads or tails of anything she said or didn’t say.”[36] For example, earlier in 2009, Kuykendall supported her 2004 contradiction of her brother’s affidavit (saying that there had been no confession) and had previously always maintained that things had been amicable between her and Willingham before the fire.[34] In 2010, she declared, “Todd murdered Amber, Karmon, and Kameron. He burnt them. He admitted he burnt them to me, and he was convicted for his crime. That is the closest to justice that my daughters will ever get.”[37]
You know what the other “evidence” was ? He had a tattoo of a skull and serpent!!
Faced with open antagonism, Trump’s millennials over the past year and a half have quietly settled on the margins: a stretch of Washington that spans from the Wharf—a shiny new development three blocks south of the National Mall—southeast along the Waterfront and into Navy Yard, on the banks of the Anacostia River. It’s a string of neighborhoods that peer out over the water, separated from most of the city by an interstate, and facing away from official Washington. It’s a bubble within the Washington bubble: Here, young Trump staffers mix largely with each other and enjoy the view from their rooftop pools, where they can feel far away from the District’s locals and the rest of its political class.
Modding: Since the OP has been thoroughly discussed and it has veered off in two different directions, I am going to close this. Feel free to open new threads about that Texas arson case and the changing politics in VA and NC
