Gainesville man arrested for arson after allegedly burning his children’s clothing on the porch of their residence
Staff report
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – Terry Byron Kimmons, Jr., 31, was arrested yesterday and charged with first-degree arson after allegedly setting his children’s clothes on fire on the porch of their residence.
At about 11:40 a.m. on Monday, Kimmons allegedly used an accelerant to set his children’s clothes on fire; the flames were reportedly more than three feet high and were in danger of catching the eaves of the multi-family unit on fire. Kimmons reportedly threw water on the fire but was unable to completely put it out, and the fire department had to be called to completely extinguish the fire.
Kimmons reportedly stated spontaneously that he had set fire to his children’s clothes, admitting that he “took it too far.”
A Fire Investigator determined that the placement of the fire was criminal in nature because it could have caused the building to catch fire.
Kimmons reportedly refused to come out and talk to the responding Gainesville Police Department officers but was arrested later in the day.
The arrest affidavit notes that Kimmons has “a history of domestic violence, criminal mischief, and aggravated assault.” He has a juvenile criminal history, one felony conviction, and one misdemeanor conviction but no charges or convictions in Alachua County. Judge Meshon Rawls set bail at $150,000.
Articles about arrests are based on reports from law enforcement agencies. The charges listed are taken from the arrest report and/or court records and are only accusations. All suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.Â
I get it..I wanted to burn my daughter’s Paw Patrol pajamas because she wouldn’t shut up about them the other night. But damn man, you don’t actually do it!
That’s taking “Liar, liar, pants on fire” a little too far.
Lighting a small standing barbecue grill on that “porch” (a concrete slab) would have produced flames at the same height as reported and would not have been considered criminal because it would have posed next to no risk to the building. It was a childish stunt to pull, but in no way deserves to be considered a crime worthy of arrest. I’m all for stopping genuinely criminal behavior, but this guy was arrested for being black and having a past.
And therein, my friends, lies the problem….
Guess he’ll never be accused of having a “flaming wit.”
Q: why do *some* women breed with these guys? And why did he burn their clothing, did the children decide to change their gender and the clothes no longer suited their new identities?
Let’s see. Man admitted to setting his children’s clothes on fire using a accelerant. The fire was set on a porch of a multi family unit. Can`t put the fire out because he used water on a substance that was an accelerent, so fire department had too. Fire was big enough to cause concern of catching house on fire. So if the building is occupied by his family he showed no regard to their safety or well being. Burning his kids clothes is failing to take care of them. Ccording to Grubbs this was a childish stunt.Obviously Grubbs must feel Dad should be the poster image for father of the year. Everything this idiot did constitutes Arson under Florida State Statute. And by the way there is nothing in report or in FSS that says Kimmons met the criteria to be arrested because he was black. Keep staying “Woke” Grubbs
Nothing this man did constitutes arson under Florida Statute, considering there was no damage to a structure and there was no intent to damage the structure. Read FS 806.01, if you can. The fire was started about 11:40 a.m., GPD and fire rescue arrived shortly thereafter, and Kimmons wasn’t arrested until 7:30 p.m., according to the arrest report — eight hours for officials to get their stories straight since they had no cause to arrest him at the time.
A small standing grill on that concrete slab “porch” (look up the address and photo of the dwelling, if you can; I did) constitutes as much an attempt at “arson” as flames rising three feet off the ground. There is also no evidence that the man could not have put out the flames, embers, or smoldering clothing “completely” by himself had the fire department not arrived first. Only two witnesses are listed. The report doesn’t mention who measured these flames or what “unable to [extinguish] completely” meant.
The only things obvious about your comment are your willful ignorance of hyperbole (the “father of the year” exaggeration that only someone as thoughtless as you could take seriously) and your childish name-calling as a form of ad hominem argument. Look up those terms, too, if you can; nobody but elementary schoolchildren intent on teasing ever referred to me by only my last name, and that was 40 years ago.
I don’t subscribe to any “woke” nonsense. Nor do I subscribe to massaging the law and the facts in order to levy charges against someone who isn’t likeable. Unlike most people around me, I am awake and alert to nonsense from both sides of the political dog pen.
I am very versed in Florida law, city ordinances, and county ordinances. Probable cause is based on facts and there is no what ifs. You assume burning clothing on a grill is normal and just. However Kimmons has been issued No Contact orders which means there is an known threat of possible retaliation to the victims or witnesses. I wonder if you would say the same things when he seriously hurts or kills one of his family members. Domestic Violence only increases in physical violence if left unchecked. Your comments about being arrested because he is solely black are assumptions and unwarranted. Please show us anywhere in this case that Kimmons was arrested based solely on the fact he was black. We dont want to hear about statistics or assumptions. Show me anywhere in this case, report, or news report that the arrest was only because Kimmons was black. This shows that you initial writing is nothing more thana childish attempt to throw race unjustly in the mix to cause hatred and mistrust of law
Enforcement. Hence you may not consider yourself “Woke” but you need to take a look in the mirror. The alertness and awake attitude you speak of seems a little off because I believe you stepped in dog sh-t in the dog pen with your race baiting.
You don’t understand hyperbole. Obviously there are no laws criminalizing skin color, or laws criminalizing past behavior for which the defendant has already paid his dues. Rather, he was charged with an arson he didn’t commit because he is unlikeable. I’ll leave it to a discerning person to guess what exactly officials found unlikeable enough about him to charge him with a crime he didn’t commit eight hours after they couldn’t come up with a charge on which to arrest him at the time of the incident.
You’re confused. You clearly do not know what arson is as defined by Florida Statute; and you clearly don’t understand that I never said anything about burning clothes on a grill. I said that a lit standing grill in that location would have caused flames just as high as those reported to have risen from the ground where the clothes were set aflame. If a lit grill under that unenclosed eave doesn’t qualify as arson, neither does another flame of the same height in the same location. It doesn’t even qualify as an intent to commit arson.
The after-the-fact charge of arson is akin to charging a speeder with hit-and-run or manslaughter because of something that could have happened instead of something that did happen. Fine the man for irresponsible behavior, but charging him eight hours later with a crime he didn’t commit and then arresting him for it is unconscionable.
You bringing up a domestic violence past and no-contact orders, neither of which he was charged with having committed or having violated in this instance, is further evidence that he’s being railroaded for his past rather than being charged with a crime he actually committed. Again, consider why you find this guy so unlikeable that you think it’s appropriate to charge him with a crime he didn’t commit.
A charge of arson is, without doubt, an example of extrapolating from facts the kind of “what ifs” you say aren’t considered when determining probable cause. A fine for an irresponsible fire is appropriate. A no-contact order is appropriate until the matter is settled, because the guy clearly has some anger management issues. Charges of arson and an arrest for such, after eight hours of officials trying to figure out what charges they could make stick, are not appropriate.
Done with it and you. Moving on
Can you please explain to me what is WOKE¿
This loser needs to be separated from his children before he harms them and the mother. He’s obviously a nut.
Just a hunk…a hunk….of burnin love!
He’s a cheating husband