Authorities have arrested a man they suspect is responsible for the Clayton fire in Northern California --what goes into tracking an arsonist?; Olympians are currently taxed for winning medals and for receiving cash bonuses, but new legislation could change that; and Trump has unveiled a vague plan he says will help shield the United States form terrorists.
Fire investigator: 'Arson is the hardest crime to get a conviction on'
A 40-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of setting the Clayton fire in northern California, which officials say has burned more than 4,000 acres and destroyed more than 175 homes and businesses in the past few days.
Damin Pashilk of Clear Lake, Calif., is being held on suspicion of a total of 17 counts of arson in Lake County, Calif., over the past year. Lake County is a largely rural area of wineries and vacation homes about 120 miles north of San Francisco.
Fire investigator Tom Pierce told Airtalk there are two types of arsonists:
- For-profit arsonist: Someone who burns down a house, for example, to file a fraudulent insurance claim; typically a one-time event.
- Serial arsonist: Someone who is usually a loner and an underachiever; commits arson to possess a false sense of authority over the actions of firefighters in this case.
On solving arson cases
Pierce: We use what's called the scientific method. It involves inductive and deductive reasoning, gathering data and going through that data.
I'm investigating a building right now, a mobile home. We start from the outside of the building and walk around it, in a 36o-degree manner, looking for fire patterns. Fire investigators read fire patterns backwards, we go into the building and go to the least damaged area and start working our way towards the most damaged area. That'll get us into the room of origin, and then we want to be within our area of origin and start looking at the micro patterns that are in there, leading us into the point of origin.
We want to know the heat source, what was the material first ignited and the sequence of events that brought those two items together to start the fire. It could have been an electrical outlet, an overheated appliance or something as simple as a candle knocked down.
Or, once the fire scene is dug out, we can perhaps see gasoline pour patterns on the floor. After you've looked at all the evidence, you can determine whether you've got an accidental fire or an incendiary fire.
On approaching large-scale fires, such as the Clayton fire
Pierce: You start to gather information from first-responders and from witnesses who saw the fire in its beginning stages. We'll then map out an area that is about a half a mile, by half a mile and work our way back to the point of origin.
Is arson a preventable crime?
Pierce: There really isn't a way to prevent an arsonist from doing what they're doing.
How difficult is it to convict an arsonist?
Pierce: Arson is the hardest crime to get a conviction on because most of the time, the evidence is gone. In homicides, you’ve got DNA and fingerprint evidence.
Read KPCC’s coverage here.
This story has been updated.
This interview has been edited for clarity.
Guest:
Tom Pierce, a fire investigator with Pierce Fire Investigations based in Bakersfield; he has been involved in fire service since 1974, and has worked with the National Fire Academy, the California State Fire Marshal's Office, and many other law enforcement organizations
Union Rescue Mission CEO: 'In focusing on one approach, LA's left thousands homeless'
As Los Angeles has increasingly focused on moving the homeless population off the street into permanent supportive housing where services are often provided on-site, advocates argue that the move may be sapping resources from fixing short-term issues.
A recent Los Angeles Times piece titled "Is the shift to permanent housing making L.A.'s homelessness problem even worse?" asks whether this focus is diverting money away from social services and transitional housing, turning many who could be helped by short-term housing back onto the street.
AirTalk guest host Patt Morrison spoke with homeless advocates about the tradeoffs, and listeners shared their personal experiences with homeless services.
Anita Nelson, CEO of a nonprofit community organization in Skid Row, said her organization is dedicated to having a “variety of housing that meets the need of a varied population.”
Union Rescue Mission's Rev. Andy Bales said he agrees with that approach, but feels part of the problem is that policymakers view homeless services as a zero-sum game. He said the singular focus on permanent housing — which he feels is sometimes politically motivated — has caused visits to his mission to skyrocket.
Interview highlights
What’s the best way to house the homeless?
Anita Nelson: Permanent supportive housing is the priority, and housing the chronically homeless is a high priority. But the population that is homeless is very diverse. I think it requires a multi-layered approach in addressing the variety of needs that are out there to help homeless individuals.
The approach is to have a variety of types of housing. The priority is housing...those individuals who have been homeless for a long period of time. But there’s also a need for housing that’s more short-term to help that individual who just really needs a place to get stabilized for a couple of months until they reconnect with their families or get a job.
Are policy makers looking at this as zero sum?
Andy Bales: Unfortunately they are. [Housing and Urban Development] has said, "We know everything’s needed, but we’re only going to fund permanent supportive housing.” Our city especially — and county — have not come up with any other funding to meet the needs of people who are on the streets.
We focused on the few, and we’ve left now over 30,000 people to suffer the devastation of homelessness on the streets. We have 500 more people under our roof right now then we did at this time last year. That’s because funding went away and shelters, and transitional housing, and domestic abuse shelters closed.
Spencer, an AirTalk caller in Canoga Park who volunteers distributing supplies to the San Fernando Valley’s homeless population views permanent supportive housing as one of many solutions.
I think permanent supportive housing is crucial. But in a city with such a vast homeless population such as Los Angeles, no one size fits all solution is going to work, but we shouldn’t not provide permanent supportive housing.
We need to have a multi-tiered approach that definitely takes care of those who can get off of their feet, supports those who only need a little bit of assistance, and support the chronically homeless.
These interviews have been edited for clarity. You can hear the full interview at the top of this post.
Guests:
Anita Nelson, CEO of SRO Housing Corp.
Rev. Andy Bales, CEO of Union Rescue Mission
How Patty Hearst went from ‘American Heiress’ to ‘urban guerrilla’
In 1974, Patricia Hearst, granddaughter of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, was kidnapped from the student apartment in Berkeley she shared with her fiancé.
A group of pseudo-Marxist radicals calling themselves the Symbionese Liberation Army were responsible, hoping to exploit her family’s fortune and clout to further their revolutionary cause.
What followed was one of the most bizarre sagas in modern American history. Hearst joined her captors in their criminal activity, robbing banks and firing a machine gun outside of a sporting goods store in Inglewood before being captured in 1975. She even gave herself the pseudonym “Tania” during her crime streak.
But why did she do it?
Jeffrey Toobin, author of “American Heiress: The Wild Saga of the Kidnapping, Crimes, and Trial of Patty Hearst,” told AirTalk the lesson that Patty Hearst teaches is: “you can’t always predict who will be radicalized or how.”
The following interview has been edited slightly for length and clarity.
Interview Highlights
Was she someone who was simply trying to find a way — after she was kidnapped — to rebel against her parents, as any young person might do, or was she a weak character in this conversion?
You know, this is the central issue of my book: Why did Patty Hearst do what she did? Was she coerced? Was she a prisoner? Was she acting against her will, or did she genuinely become a member of the SLA? This gets caught up in terms that are very much associated with this case, like brainwashing, Stockholm syndrome. My view is, I try to avoid that jargon, and just look at what Patty Hearst did. When you look at how many times she could have left the SLA in the year-and-a-half and how many times she acted independently to join with them in an astonishing number of crimes — three bank robberies, several bombings, shooting up a street in Los Angeles — my view is that she did in fact join the SLA — at least while she was with them — and was in fact an “urban guerrilla,” as she described herself when she was arrested.
Patty Hearst’s switch from kidnapped heiress to SLA member happened to some extent through girl talk. Was this a political conversion or a sense of, ‘Well, I’ve never met these people before, but they’re kind of making sense?’
I think it’s hard to pinpoint each individual reason. All of these things were factors. In part it was Angela Atwood, the woman who befriended her, one of the kidnappers. It was also another one of the kidnappers, Willie Wolfe, who according to the survivors of the SLA she fell in love with — and in fact that evidence of her relationship with Willie Wolfe wound up being crucial in her criminal trial two years later. The fact that she was 19 years old, and impressionable, and restless and unhappy in the life she was leading as Steven Weed’s fiancé. I think it all came together in an opportunity for her to get outside her life, get away from her family, and at least for a time, become an actual revolutionary.
This is a very well-known case, but you did find some new material?
I did, one of the things that was particularly meaningful for me is that when she’s arrested in September 1975, she is living with her other SLA boyfriend. Her first was Willie Wolfe, who died in the shootout in May of ’74. But later she’s living with Steve Soliah. Steve Soliah is also arrested the same day, and I have letters that had not been published before that she wrote from her jail cell to Steve Soliah in his jail cell, talking about how, “We’re going to keep fighting in the revolution,” and “We’re not going to let the oppressors bother us.” These letters where she’s by herself are the letters of an urban guerrilla. That’s why I reached the conclusion, this and many other things, that by the time she’s arrested, she’s a committed member of the SLA.
Was the Patty Hearst case an anomaly? Or are there some symbolic issues that are with us to this day?
Oh, I think that there are many symbolic issues, and many topical issues. You know, we are living in a moment where we wonder how a kid from the Minneapolis suburbs decides to join ISIS; we wonder how a kid in Brussels or Paris decides to become a terrorist. Why people decide to change their lives and move in a terribly violent direction is a question that is very much top of mind throughout our society. I think the short answer is: We don’t know, and it’s different for different people. When we try to say, “That person would never do that,” we can’t be sure. I think the lesson of the Patty Hearst story is that people become radicalized in different ways, and you can’t always predict who will be radicalized or how.
Guest:
Jeffrey Toobin, staff writer at the New Yorker and author of “American Heiress: The Wild Saga of the Kidnapping, Crimes, and Trial of Patty Hearst;” he tweets from
Taxing U.S. Olympians for medal winnings
Both the U.S. Senate and House are considering legislation that would eliminate taxation on Olympic medalists' winnings (a similar bill in California failed to advance this week).
Currently, any athlete that medals earns upwards of $10,000 plus the value of the medal itself.
Despite the fact that Nobel Prize winnings and Pulitzer Prize winnings are taxed, the lawmakers argue most Olympians spend years in grueling training to bring glory to the U.S., leaving over little time to build careers and salaries.
The advocacy group Citizens for Tax Justice disagrees with a special exemption: "There is no moral or economic case for exempting the earnings of Olympic athletes over other categories of workers. Is the work done by athletes really more important than that of computer programmers, doctors, firefighters, or soldiers?"
In a press release, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) counters, “Most countries subsidize their athletes; the very least we can do is make sure our athletes don’t get hit with a tax bill for winning. After a successful and hard fought victory, it’s just not right for the U.S. to welcome these athletes home with a tax on that victory."
What do you think?
Guests:
Assemblyman Brian Jones (R - Santee), Jones’ California version of this bill failed to advance this week
Matthew Gardner, Executive Director, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy - described as a non-profit, non-partisan research body
Could you pass a citizenship test?
Donald Trump was challenged Monday with taking a U.S. citizenship test by Khizr Khan, a Muslim- American man who made waves with his speech at the Democratic National Convention last month.
Khan is the father of a Muslim-American war hero who was killed in battle, fighting for the U.S.
This comes on the heels of Trump’s foreign policy address in Ohio. The GOP presidential nominee is calling for a new test for visa applicants as part of a vetting process.
It is uncertain if Trump will accept the challenge. A long-standing argument with the naturalization test is whether U.S. citizens born in the country could pass it.
Patt Morrison speaks to a civic engagement specialist today, to weigh in on the test’s standards and find out the likelihood of the average American passing the U.S. Naturalization test.
Take the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services practice Civics Test here.
Guests:
Kei Kawashima-Ginsberg, Ph.D., Director, Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University
Ted McConnell, executive director, Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools, a coalition of over 70 national civic learning, education, civic engagement and business groups committed to improving the quality and quantity of civic learning in American schools
What 'The Nightly Show’s' cancellation means for the landscape of late-night
It was announced Monday that Comedy Central has canceled “The Nightly Show” with Larry Wilmore.
The show will be temporarily replaced starting this week, with host Chris Hardwick’s “@Midnight.”
Wilmore’s show took on an unique perspective that focused not only on topical satire, but issues of race played heavily in his comedy. Prior to hosting “The Nightly Show” he was a correspondent on “The Daily Show” with Jon Stewart.
During its two-year run, Wilmore’s show took over the spot on Comedy Central “The Colbert Report” left behind. In the end, it wasn’t just lacking in conventional live ratings. According to Comedy Central President Ken Alterman, it also failed among social media platforms, which ultimately sealed the show’s fate.
And in an age when a digital presence can make or break the longevity of a program, what does this mean for the landscape of late-night television?
One criticism that comes as a result of Wilmore’s departure is the continuing lack of diversity in the entertainment industry. In an article for “The Hollywood Reporter,” he is quoted on what he calls the “unblackening” of his time slot on the network. So is late-night becoming even less diverse? While white, male late-night hosts are still dominant, comedians like Trevor Noah, Samantha Bee and Chelsea Handler are still standing in the fight for ratings and are making waves both with live audiences and on social media.
Guest:
Brian Steinberg, senior television editor for Variety