Fire Investigation Forms: Fill & Download for Free

Very significant. So far, Trump fired two people who lead such investigations - S. Yates and J. Comey, - and a third (P. Bharara) who was investigating something related. As I understand, Trump cannot fire a special counsel at whim. Also note that J. Sessions (a Trump loyalist) who is leading the Department of Justice has already recused himself from related investigations, so he can neither appoint nor fire a special counsel.Robert Mueller has a clean reputation, understands what is at stake (including the reputation of the FBI which he lead for many years) and is very unlikely to be swayed by Trump. We can expect a thorough investigation.

I think it is because Trump is setting the stage to fire Jeff Sessions, to try to get control over the Mueller investigation, and perhaps more importantly, the investigation(s) coming out of the Southern District of New York. McGann is against the idea of firing Sessions, but Trump wants to do it anyway.As an added note, I don’t think it is firing Sessions that would be such a big deal per se, but more what happens after that. It’s a bit like when Trump fired Comey, he thought that would derail the investigation into his campaign, but all it did is trigger the appointment of Mueller, and a new FBI Director in Chris Ray, who has continued to manage the FBI in a similar fashion to Comey (without the press conferences). So Trump can get rid of McGann, and fire Sessions, but then he has to put someone else in as AG, and the Senate is not going to approve just anyone. They are going to insist that whoever gets in allows the Mueller probe to continue.I personally think that Trump is more concerned about the SDNY investigation, and probably should be. What some have missed is that those people work for Sessions too, and he is not recused there, but he’s not stopping any investigation into Trump’s business dealings, like Trump wants him to. I think what Trump wants is to get a new AG in there who can control the SDNY investigation. But it is probably too late.

This answer may contain sensitive images. Click on an image to unblur it.We don’t have an exact timeline of the Orlando Nightclub Shootings yet.I can tell you that there is no way anyone from the club’s crowd could have incapacitated the shooter in the first moments of the attack; it doesn’t matter if anyone in the crowd was armed (which somebody was). A lot of the reasons this particular attack was the worst mass shooting in American history revolve around the venue; nightclubs are absurdly dangerous when anything goes wrong. I’ll qualify those opinions later.Source: (Former Orlando nightclub photographer: 'Tell people ... you love them”)First of all, I have some amount of background in building codes and inspection techniques. I’ve taken classes on everything except the International Plumbing Code.Those books aren’t cheap.While this may seem tangential to a mass shooting, a big part of commercial building codes across the world is fire prevention and building egress. The size, number, and location of building exits has to be carefully determined based on the building’s layout and maximum occupancy. This is because both fires and ensuing panic they cause are huge threats, especially in assembly occupancies like night clubs.We’re going to use the Station nightclub fire as an illustrative example of crowds panicking when attempting egress. The Station burned to the ground on February 20, 2003 because a band performing at the venue illegally used fireworks inside the building, igniting the stage’s sound insulation. Of the 462 people inside the club, 100 died and 230 were injured. It isn’t the worst nightclub fire in US history but what makes it notable is the fact that we have the entire thing on video. This made the incident of particular interest to fire investigators and building safety officials everywhere since we know exactly what happened from the very beginning.I urge discretion to viewers, this video is disturbing. Do not watch it if you believe you may be emotionally affected by it.Here’s a floor plan, take notice that there are actually a fair number of exits.Source: (The Station nightclub fire)These are the locations where the victims inside the building died.Source: (The Station nightclub fire)The first particularly interesting thing about the incident is that it took about 30 seconds for the band to realize something was wrong and stop playing. The band was literally feet away from the blaze. It took many in the crowd a bit longer than that to process the situation. But once everybody figured it out, there was a a rush for the exits. The most telling thing is the huge number of people who attempted to leave the way they came in. One or two people tripped and the crowd pushed over them, causing more people to trip and eventually blocking the entire exit with human bodies stacked on top of each other. It took less than two minutes for that to happen. The crowd pushing from the back to get away from the flames and smoke boxed in the people already inside the hallway, denying them the chance to find another way out.Visit the following National Fire Protection Association website if you want to learn more about nightclubs and other assembly occupancies. The page includes a case study of the Station fire and the NFPA’s response.The effects of the fire itself aren’t really relevant to a mass shooting inside a nightclub, but the crowd behavior a fire induces is. It has repeatedly been observed in all buildings, not just nightclubs, that in emergency situations between half and a third of the occupants will attempt to retrace their steps and exit the way they entered the building. The primary factor which mitigates this practice is if the source of danger is directly and observably blocking the occupant’s point of entry. If confronted with danger during egress, most occupants will flee with little regard for where their flight takes them. In nightclubs in particular, this is dangerous because of poor lighting, potential slip or trip hazards, and the dense crowds common to the occupancy type. Nightclubs are also very distracting environments which makes it more difficult for occupants to detect emergencies in the first place. All this makes nightclubs a perfect environment for human stampedes.But specifically about the Pulse Nightclub Shooting…This was the only decent floor plan I’ve been able to find so far. It’ll have to do.Source: (Three Hours of Horror: Inside the Orlando Nightclub Massacre)At this point in time the preliminary eyewitness accounts seem to indicate the shooter entered the club and opened fire somewhere on the main dance floor targeting the bar. One common thread between most of the eyewitness accounts and videos is that many patrons of the club didn’t realize anything was happening at first due to the club’s distracting environment. This is similar in many ways to what happened at Station. The crowd in Pulse was completely caught off guard. I’d guess the shooter probably expended his first magazine before the entire crowd realized what was happening. You can’t take the opportunity to incapacitate a shooter if you don’t know that a shooting is happening in the first place, so the opening moments of the attack are out of the running.Green “O”s represent patrons. The red “X” and associated markings represent the shooter.Once the crowd realizes there is shooting though, people panic. On top of the poor lighting, every fallen victim is a trip hazard for the fleeing survivors. This is another case where most of the crowd can not attempt to incapacitate the shooter simply due to crowd movement; if you’re in the middle of the crowd, you’re moving with it. The reason I suspect the shooter was more or less in the spot where I placed him is because much of the crowd fled to the patio. That would indicate the crowd didn’t have the option of retracing their steps for egress. Many patrons in other room on the left similarly heard gunfire from their entry point and fled to the bathrooms in panic. There may have been one or more stampedes.Somewhere around this point in time, an off duty police officer engages the shooter. A gunfight between the two breaks out. As far as we currently know, neither the shooter or the officer was injured, but the shooter did retreat to the bathrooms. It should be noted that the off duty police officer is at a significant disadvantage in the nightclub’s environment. The officer must be able to pick out the shooter in poor lighting among lots of other people present. By contrast, all the shooter has to do is fire at anything which is moving. I would estimate that roughly 60–80% of casualties had already been inflicted at this point.I’m having the blue police officer take cover behind the bar just for the sake of drawing. We have no real idea of where he actually was.Once the shooter retreated, I feel it is likely the officer decided not to pursue but instead hold the area so victims could be retrieved from the main dance floor with some measure of safety. At this point, any potential crowd involvement has ended. The victims hiding in the bathrooms are in no position to ambush the shooter.The reason this attack differs from something like the the 2011 Tucson shooting is due to the venue. In the Tucson shooting the crowd wasn’t confined to fleeing en masse through designated exits; they could disperse into the surrounding parking lot. Because of that, some crowd members were able to stay behind and engage the shooter after the first volley of gunfire.But with night clubs, the unfortunate truth is that if you don’t follow the crowd, you will be trampled. This has been observed time and time again in fires. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it happened at Pulse.