Yesterday I linked a post by Steve Huff which pointed out a coincidence as regards Ben Fawley and a fire. Previously I noted his curious before and after photos of one of, if not the largest fires Richmond has ever seen.
Today there's yet another case of Fawley, not only having before and after photos of an entirely different fire - but, from his own words, he was standing there watching when the police and firemen came to deal with it. The pics are gone now, but his text is still there.
:: Now this building is more than just abandoned, it is in ruin. I got the one photo of the roof inside before the fire due to the bum that was living in the place. I talked to the crazy guy & noted his three dogs. I hear he wasn't inside for the fire, but what about the three dogs? I wanted to take more photos but again the cops came & chased me off. I was just glad I was outside the fence when they came. ::
Just how many of these coincidences are there, I wonder?
Also see his comments on the VCU fire here. His photo was nice? Right!
:: Photo # 215 is nice. The ground was smoking after the ball of flames rolled across the street setting the fire truck, cars, trees, the building across the street and more on fire. This fire started with the building on the left and ended up setting over 21 other building on fire over 5 city blocks to reach I95 & crossed I95 to set fire to a shed. My apartment was in the fire zone, but didn't burn. One women did die, the news media didn't note the death, she was just some poor lady with medical problems. The fire didn't kill her, the city shut our electric off at 1pm that day and left it off till 5pm the next day. That was what killed the lady, she was on some sort of life support that needed power. All the news noted about this fire was the loss to the college. ::


The red text is a nice touch, huh.
Posted by: Captain Joe | Monday, September 26, 2005 at 08:17 PM
The red text is a nice touch, huh.
Posted by: Captain Joe | Monday, September 26, 2005 at 08:20 PM
The rail warehouse fire occurred on Halloween 2004, Didn't the Ravish fire occur on that date too. Gee, I wonder how many fires occurred on Halloween the last few years in Richmond?
Posted by: Captain Joe | Monday, September 26, 2005 at 08:23 PM
:: well thanx to Richmond's arsonist there is now nothing up top. ::
now there's an interesting statement made to a poster by Sculz.
Posted by: Kathleen | Monday, September 26, 2005 at 08:37 PM
I thought that statement was made by Skulz, not a commenter.
Posted by: Dan | Monday, September 26, 2005 at 08:40 PM
heh, isn't that what I just said? :)
Posted by: Kathleen | Monday, September 26, 2005 at 08:48 PM
"fire occurred on Halloween 2004"
Well, we know THIS halloween will be safe:
"Fawley held without bond until his preliminary hearing on Oct. 31."
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2005/week39/index.html
Posted by: AkekoaHoAlethia | Tuesday, September 27, 2005 at 01:01 AM
Dan,
You're right about the occurrence of common coincidences that just happily come upon this poor amateur, no talent, camera carrying creep.
He just "happens" to see a "large unused warehouse just sitting there, nobody noticing it there. I took the photos above because I liked the roof of this old warehouse. I remember a building a lot like this in Philly."
[Dan have you checked out the fires in that area of Philly?]
He is then "glad" he got the pics because, poof, it is another that burns down!!!
Here's another very telling statement, just above where he had the burnt building pics!:
"The photos below are why I am glad I took the photos. ::" {burnt building here}
It would be interesting to see the correlation between 'burnt old abandoned buildings,' his photos and where he has lived!
Better yet, as one of your previous commenters mentioned, old abandoned buildings in the area for the whereabouts of Taylor???
Posted by: AkekoaHoAlethia | Tuesday, September 27, 2005 at 01:22 AM
Dan,
You are right!!!!
You have also uncovered, or "sniffed out" an arsonist here!!
Surely, you have passed this on to the police, right?
I see what you say are the phrases of an arsonist, in just these entries alone, it is enough to look much more carefully
=================== Quotes from the journal http://www.livejournal.com/community/urban_decay/890218.html
-----------------------------------------
:: The smell of smoke just before noon, ended with 21 hours of fun...
:: Random photos can pay off....
I was first on scene with a camera....
:: Photo # 215 is nice. The ground was smoking after the ball of flames...
All the news noted about this fire...
all that was left of the building...
right where I was standing taking photos...
How to kill over 21 buildings in a day?
a city that doesn't know what it is doing. ::
it won't be long till the next fire. ::
---------------------------------------------
AND
He has a vendetta against the city, "But it wasn't up to code and the code in the city was a bit lax."
He keeps ranting on this theme: city codes not followed.
Dan, did you notice, "In Philly I was always in a warehouse of some sort."?
Posted by: AkekoaHoAlethia | Tuesday, September 27, 2005 at 01:45 AM
The tree in the upper left corner of the 'before' picture has lots of leaves whereas the other two pictures of the fire show trees with little or no leaves. The 'before' picture may have actually been taken later in the summer after the rebuilding. We might be giving this guy too much credit.
Posted by: mmy | Tuesday, September 27, 2005 at 03:30 PM
Yes, indeed , that IS NOT a before picture. Dan, I believe this was pointed out to you or maybe another blog site- dark side?- a while back when the attempt was made to claim this picture as a before shot.
Not only do the tree give this away, but the picture of the 'whole' building that you incorrectly attribute as a before picture, has BRICKS on it, where as the picture of the burning building only has the Tyvek- no bricks had been applied yet.
The "whole" building then is most certainly NOT a before picture, but is a picture of the post fire and the rebuilding of that unit.
(hate to have rumors out there :) )
Posted by: sondrad | Tuesday, September 27, 2005 at 08:38 PM
The fire was about a block from his house, so it's no surprise he'd be the first to show up with a camera.
Hey, I think the dude is a total slimo, but they already proved the fire was started by a construction worker who threw his lit cigarette down a trash chute--people saw him do it and then saw the fire burst out.
Posted by: cosmicMojo | Wednesday, September 28, 2005 at 08:28 AM
And isn't it ironic, his first hearing is set for October 31st.
Posted by: Lois | Thursday, September 29, 2005 at 02:41 PM