Citrus Heights, CA

Monday, June 06, 2011

 YES, IT DEFINITELY IS MURDER!

To promote a defective safety device, intended to protect human life, with deliberately falsified performance claims will result in lives being lost when the device fails to perform as advertised. That is a felony. To rig and falsify fire tests so that a defective and unreliable fire or smoke detector can be "certified" as "reliable" is a felony. To sell (or help sell) a so-called smoke detector, knowing that it is defective, unreliable, prone to false alarming and that fire deaths are frequent when it fails to warn is a felony. To conceal from the public the continuing endangerment to life (by failing to report the true reasons why a safety device failed to warn when fire deaths occurred) is to cover-up a deadly crime. That is protecting criminals while prolonging the endangerment. Obviously, that also is a felony.

When deaths occur due to a felony it equates to murder. That's the law. All who conspire to commit a crime are equally guilty. That is why the man driving the get-away car is equally guilty of murder if his accomplice in the store kills the clerk. Yes, there are many professionals of the fire safety field who have cooperated with the slime who helped sell phony "smoke" detectors into millions of America homes. It is incredible but true, many within the fire regulatory community have conspired to market (or aid in the marketing and cover-up) of a defective device that has caused tens of thousands of fire deaths.

Those who were killed by terrorists the day the planes flew into the World Trade Towers in New York City numbered about four thousand. Those who have died due to the smoke detector fraud, by my count, number about 75 thousand. It seems that many of those who reside within this nation, and were trusted to protect us, were far more deadly than our foreign enemies.

The relatives of those killed by the outside terrorists have been compensated and monuments have been erected to their memories. There has been no government compensation for the many that were killed by those we trusted to protect us. No monuments have been erected to their memories. Indeed, the killing continues even until today. It seems that in their memory, to even designate those who killed them as "murderers" upsets the sensibilities of the apologists. I merely provide the message. Those who criticize my choice of words are often the very ones who have committed the crimes.

Below I include a recent letter to the Governor of California requesting his help in bringing to an end a fraud that has been unbelievably deadly.

June 2, 2011

Governor Edmund G. Brown

State Capitol, Suite 1173

Sacramento, CA 95814

Subject: "SMOKE" DETECTORS "CERTIFIED" BY CA ARE KILLING CHILDREN

Dear Governor Brown:

I am enclosing and referencing proofs that the ionization type so-called smoke detector that the California state fire marshal is "certifying" as reliable actually is killing children. It's a fact, this (California Certified) device has been determined by a court of law (see the enclosed report) to be "defectively designed" and "the legal cause" of the deaths of children". Therefore, it follows that when any government official "certifies" that this device will protect children from fire in the home, it must be classed as a felony.

The California State Fire Marshal has been allowing the "fire marshal's seal" to be printed on the box containing the defective device "as a guarantee of the reliability of the device" (See the enclosed copy of the detector cover showing the FM's seal). It can be roughly estimated that every month that the California State Fire Marshal, Tanya Hoover, promotes the deadly detector (which hides the need for honest fire detectors) approximately 30 people in California are wrongly killed or injured by home fires.

The former state fire marshal of Indiana, Roger Johnson, tested the ionization device with live fire tests employing fire department personnel. The testing confirmed (once again) that the device is not capable of reliably detecting real (visible) smoke and is an endangerment to human life. Chief Johnson made the following statement after the testing: "We have five million ionization smoke alarms in this state that may fail in the time of need." Indiana State Fire Marshal Roger Johnson, September 2007. Here are additional comments by others who have investigated this fraud. Mr. Adrian Butler stated that, "Recommending, selling, or installing ionization smoke alarms is a criminal act of negligence." Source: Adrian Butler, co-founder of the World Fire Safety Foundation and its web site. 2007. Courtney Stewart said, "It is truly alarming . . . it is so stunning and so horrifying and it is so hard to believe that it's something the people just don't know. Most smoke detectors don't detect deadly smoke" Source: Courtney Stewart, Senior editor, The Hook, Charlottesville, VA, July 2008. This is but a tiny sample of the evidence of fraud as related to the defective so-called "smoke" detector. An enormous amount of evidence confirming that the smoke detector sales have been a criminal venture is now posted on this web site: www.TheWorldFireSafetyFoundation.org.

Governor Brown, although the great majority of the fire deaths and injuries associated with this fraudulent device have been due to house fires, the endangerment of the public also exists in larger buildings such as hospitals, nursing homes, hotels, motels, apartment buildings, high rise office buildings, theatres, and all other buildings where the number of occupants will be high. To illustrate the problem with the high rise building type you will find enclosed an extract from a study of the

smoke detector problem entitled, "The Ionization Smoke Detectors and Smoke Aging". This study (following the Prudential Building fire in Boston during 1986) was prepared by fire experts from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, the Boston Fire Department and Yale University. The Prudential Building is a 52 story high rise and it suffered a fire on the 14th floor on January 2, 1986. The fire penetrated the elevator shafts on the fire floor. Then smoke rose up and poured out of the shafts on floors 43, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51, and 52. For approximately two hours thick smoke enveloped the smoke detectors in the elevator lobbies on the above floors. None of the ionization devices operated. However, when the fire inspectors later tested the same detectors with the usual testing device, all of the smoke detectors responded normally to the test spray.

What the Prudential Building fire of 1986 proved was that the device that is in most buildings in California is virtually useless for warning of real (visible) smoke, but that it responds very well to the device the fire inspectors us to test it with. Thus, when an inspector tests an ionization device in an apartment building it will respond to the test spray (that is sold in a can that looks like a bug spray can.). The inspector will then assure the lady of the home that all is well and that her kids are safe because the device "will warn promptly if a fire occurs". However, if a real fire occurs a week later, the device will probably respond to the smoke the same way it did in the Prudential Building; meaning not at all. Assuming the kids are then lost, it is a near certainty the deaths will be explained by telling the reporters the batteries were missing.

Because the ionization type so-called smoke detector responds to non-fire conditions, such as the shower running and bread being toasted, the public believes it will warn when real fires occur. Yet, as a result of the Cal-Chiefs/IAFC tests of 1978, Chief John Gerard of the Los Angeles Fire Department estimated that the device: "would have a "50 to 80 percent failure rate". That is a horrible performance for a device supposedly "protecting" the children while asleep.

Governor Brown, it is essential that the parents of California have honest information regarding the devices protecting their children. So I ask that you require the state fire marshal to initiate a program of warning the public that the ionization so-called "smoke" is defective. I also request that these often deadly devices be recalled and replaced with honest and reliable fire detectors. To fail to do so will obviously result in many additional wrongful fire deaths and injuries of a most horrific nature.

Sincerely,

Richard M. Patton,

Professional Engineer, Researcher, Consultant

Copy: Media

Richard M Patton

President

Crusade Against Fire Deaths

Citrus Heights, CA

916-721-7700