Stanley Blake, 42, torched the trees growing by the side of Broad Street, Dagenham, on at least three occasions this year.It's most odd, because his address is given as Porters Avenue, which as you can see from Googlemaps isn't exactly a treeless wasteland:
The blaze damaged a telegraph pole causing a number of homes to temporarily lose their phone line, according to residents living in the area.
Blake, of Porters Avenue, Dagenham, has been handed an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (Asbo) by the council and police barring him from entering Broad Street and nearby Armstead Walk until April 2013.
And even more to the point, at the top of that road, you may just be able to see a park. It's got....guess what?
Yup, trees. Hundreds of them.
So, it's a bit of a mystery why he'd need to go out of his way - all the way to Broad St - to indulge his apparent arboreal arson complex...
8 comments:
Shame there aren't any trees in Downing Street.
Why isn't this being charged as arson with reckless endangerment of life? There are houses nearby and they could have caught fire.
I fail to see why anyone should feel safer merely because an arsonist has been given permission to set fire to something elsewhere, just so long as it isn't what he torched before.
Perhaps they were special trees ...
Y'know .. like "The Flame Trees of Thika" ?
Or maybe he was re-enacting a scene from the Bible & thought he was Abraham ?
Who, as we all know .. ended up getting his bush burned .. ;)
It looks like a case of not shitting in your own nest.
Perhaps a squirrel shat on him from said trees, and his desire for revenge knows no bounds.
Burn, bushy, burn!
"Perhaps a squirrel shat on him from said trees, and his desire for revenge knows no bounds" ...
What's got a Hazelnut in every bite ?
Squirrel shit ..
Maybe old Stan the Man has a nut allergy .. they're all the rage y'know .. allergies & intolerancies ..
Funny how none of 'em are allergic to, or intolerant of compensayshun, though .. eh ?
Considering the reaction of some Councils to falling conkers/leaves &c, I'm surprised the Elfin-safe-Tea squad hasn't burnt down the rest of the trees - "To ensure he doesn't do it again"
"Why isn't this being charged as arson with reckless endangerment of life?"
I'm guessing laziness...
"Considering the reaction of some Councils to falling conkers/leaves &c, I'm surprised the Elfin-safe-Tea squad hasn't burnt down the rest of the trees - "To ensure he doesn't do it again""
Heh!
Post a Comment