Stamford, CT. facing lawsuit for negligence in fatal fire
Legal panel weighs in on the case
- Duration 5:29
- Date May 7, 2012
Legal panel weighs in on the case
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
I'm Kelly -- back in session on the docket today -- Christmas Day tragedy in Connecticut which is now Smart sparked a lawsuit.
Lost his three young daughters when fire raced through the girl Stamford home they were staying with their mom it was Christmas.
Nine year old Lily and twin girls were seven years old Sarah and grace.
They were living with their -- they were there with their mother on Christmas night along with her parents even -- the house was being renovated.
And while there was -- smoke detector system in the house at the time it was not hooked up.
So the father who was not in the house on the night in question is now suing the city of Stanford.
Claiming the city did not properly oversee that construction -- to the death of his three girls.
Turning now to discuss it -- -- Allah former prosecutor now defense attorney and mark -- same credentials former prosecutor now -- -- this case this dark it's so disturbing these three little beautiful girls and their grandparents and the mother is the one who lives.
They say the fire started.
Mark because that -- that contractor who have been working on the house allegedly disposed of ashes.
From the fireplace.
And there was really no no chance.
Of these five remembers getting out of house how does the father now stepping in -- the city.
Well he's arguing that the city owed a duty with the city does the nature of the house is safe and they breached their duty by performing inspections on this home.
Granting permits leaving everybody to believe that the house was safe to live then when it wasn't.
This was a fire trap waiting to happen an accident just waiting to occur because while -- work fire detectors there.
They were not hooked up and that's the question -- there whether the city had an obligation not to allow.
A certificate of occupancy or okay on the permit for construction when they knew that people would be living there.
And smoke detectors.
Would not be hooked up but did they know.
Okay so here's here's the bottom line they write in the Paper and and march is quoted a fire trap waiting happened.
According to to published reports what happened was on Christmas Eve there was a fire in the fireplace.
And the contractor was also the boyfriend the new boyfriend of the mother.
And the girls were concerned this is I'm not I would never joke about this that when Santa Claus came down the chimney he was gonna get burnt so to appease the little girls.
The -- contract this alleged boyfriend takes the hot cold out.
Of the fireplace placing them in a bag and put them in a hallway.
And at the dot.
-- -- the big numbers during a fire truck waiting how.
It happened and taking burning embers -- a bag of disposing them improperly I mean negative.
How far we gonna go with the having the government literally in our homes.
I mean the yes there's certain it's there's certain things that the government should take -- -- think.
But there's also a degree of personal responsibility.
At something like that are putting burning embers in a bag in the house with people sleeping in the house where people warns that it's ridiculous to preposterous well I don't.
How how I'm not with all due respect that man how is it not all his fault mark.
It can't be a 100% his fault.
No question he bears responsibility I again I I live in south -- we don't know from fireplaces but it's not I've gone skiing he'll leave the burning.
-- the Amber's in there you don't taken out if you do you'll put him up Paper bag and put -- by the house syndicate if you catch on fire.
But what you do is in a civil lawsuit you bring it all potential parties may be -- responsibility he would be at the same tape.
But he hasn't city but he hasn't done that yet and it -- no there's no funny business going on apparently.
This this mother and -- father had filed for divorce -- she'd she'd announced he wanted to divorce and they were separated I guess from what I read.
And -- she had this boyfriend who was there or did the thing with the embers but -- but the father.
That the father of these students three little girls who is clearly not at fault he has not yet sued the -- -- dispose of the ashes improperly.
The boyfriend then.
At some point if he does file this lawsuit for sure but now they say Arthur that the insurance company.
Has said it should not have to pay the claims because they believe that the boyfriend.
The work that his company was performing on.
House which is there the insurance company they're the investigators -- -- the ones who have financially liable.
So this is going to be a very fact specific.
Type of lawsuit.
It's gonna be fact specific based on one of the contractor actually do what he save that he did have a different than what he did.
When did this -- come and inspect how.
You get -- have a minute left less that how can you get how can you sue the city over.
Smoke detectors that weren't installed there weren't working we can have so many loss -- that'll allow that I agree it's got to be we've got bases on personal responsibility.
Edge of personal common sense are.
Weis who every how.
House is gonna live and Specter in the house 24/7 to make sure even -- -- have a smoke alarm in the battery.
-- goes dead and I don't replace the battery the same exact thing could happen right -- -- quick last word mark.
May -- because and get itself back sensitive maybe because they didn't check to make sure it was wired they signed up okay must be wired humble apartment that's got to be the basis behind his losses there must have been some.
Duty that was breaches are going to be tough because there -- -- there may be immunity depending on what the facts are guys thank you both.