pie_flavor parent
He started a continuous combustion reaction, and Malibu was destroyed by the continuance of that combustion reaction. Whether at some point the orange light it was giving off dimmed a bit is not very interesting. He committed the crime; then emergency services tried to mitigate the damage but failed. These are two fully separate things.
> He started a continuous combustion reaction, and Malibu was destroyed by the continuance of that combustion reaction. Whether at some point the orange light it was giving off dimmed a bit is not very interesting.
So they can prove that this was one continuous combustion reaction? They can show beyond reasonable doubt that, despite the observations of the fire going out that convinced a team of firefighting professionals that it had stopped, it in fact continued and nothing else ignited a new fire in this location where fires naturally occur?
Were not the LA fire occurring in three different locations at the same time? It could not have been started by the same smoldering ash.