GRANDIN - Man pleads guilty to setting wooden bathroom on fire

A Grandin man pleaded guilty to setting fire to a wooden bathroom in a national park. Jason Douglas Phelps, 19, pleaded guilty to one felony count of Setting Fire to a Building Owned by the United States Wednesday.

[WHAT]

I reameber when two guys put the outhose in the middle of the street in grandin back in the 80's... Now that was a laugh.

[General-]

I kind of feel sorry for this kid. Yes, he did something that was illegal. But, had he set fire to a construction worker's port-a-potty, would he be in the same amount of trouble? Up to 25 years in prison? Nah, probably not. But, it was because it was property of the United States.

That's not saying he shouldn't get in major trouble for doing what he did; but maybe, just not as much trouble as he is facing now.

[finallysomepeace]

WHAT wrote:

I reameber when two guys put the outhose in the middle of the street in grandin back in the 80's... Now that was a laugh.

I have a newspaper clipping from that incident.....they wrote on the side of it "mayor's office" (I think). lol

[You what]

I don't feel sorry for him. People like him are the reason why we don't have better parks and places to enjoy.

People like him tear up more than they are worth.

He is headed to the right place, hope nobody tears his outhouse up while he's locked up. Maybe he can have some butter handy.

[nicholson72]

What a shame! A young man who may spend serious prison time for an act that he probably just considered a prank.
I hope the young man doesn't have any prior "run-ins" with law officials.

[General-]

Exactly my point, Nicholson72. Hopefully he doesn't have any priors.

[think about it]

It seems they will send a young person to prison for just about anything these days. Like it's not overcrowded enough. It's a shame that common sense has flown the coop in our society and government.

Not taking up for the young man's actions. Don't even know him. Is this the same one they call Phico?

The only thing prison does for a young person is make them hardened, bitter and often times worse than they were before.

One solution for young vandals is to be appointed a mentor who will enforce consequences that leave an impression to change for the betterment of said offender and society as well. Is this not the purpose of the prison system, to reform? What a joke that is.

He should be required to build a new outhouse, whether it is used or not, along with a strong mentor so that he can acquire self-discipline, skills and a sense of accomplishment, as well as payment for his destructive impulse. He should also be held accountable for the cost.

Since law enforcement take an oath to "protect and serve", it would be a great job (mentoring) for them to have instead of lurking in the bushes hoping to catch a speeder, don't you think?

Now that's what I call getting my tax money's worth.

[General-]

I couldn't agree more! I think he should be required to rebuild the outhouse with his own money.

No, that's not "Phico."

[phelps]

this is his brother and he was not the only one that was in on the burning of the bathroom and he got out of it and my brother took the rap for it all he should not get nothing for it, i think

[what]

finallysomepeace wrote:

<quoted text>I have a newspaper clipping from that incident.....they wrote on the side of it "mayor's office" (I think). lol

you of all people. are laughing about this, after what you said on topix about your family not getting in trouble that he did the right thing by snitching on jason.you are one smart cookie,lmao at YOU!

[finallysomepeace]

what wrote:

<quoted text>you of all people. are laughing about this, after what you said on topix about your family not getting in trouble that he did the right thing by snitching on jason.you are one smart cookie,lmao at YOU!

The incident in reference here happened in 1981 or 82 and it was funny, then and now. It was an old outhouse they put at the stop sign. As for the current incident, I don't find the burning of government property funny, however, if my "family" was an innocent bystander, along for the ride, and didn't assist in burning of the outhouse, why should he be in trouble? They are entirely two different matters. One is funny and one is not. Too bad your too immature to be able to tell the difference.

[finallysomepeace]

For the record, I believe a harsh punishment such as they are suggesting for Jason is utterly ridiculous.

[rediculous]

think about it wrote:

It seems they will send a young person to prison for just about anything these days. Like it's not overcrowded enough. It's a shame that common sense has flown the coop in our society and government.
Not taking up for the young man's actions. Don't even know him. Is this the same one they call Phico?
The only thing prison does for a young person is make them hardened, bitter and often times worse than they were before.
One solution for young vandals is to be appointed a mentor who will enforce consequences that leave an impression to change for the betterment of said offender and society as well. Is this not the purpose of the prison system, to reform? What a joke that is.
He should be required to build a new outhouse, whether it is used or not, along with a strong mentor so that he can acquire self-discipline, skills and a sense of accomplishment, as well as payment for his destructive impulse. He should also be held accountable for the cost.
Since law enforcement take an oath to "protect and serve", it would be a great job (mentoring) for them to have instead of lurking in the bushes hoping to catch a speeder, don't you think?
Now that's what I call getting my tax money's worth.

i agree

[WHAT]

finallysomepeace wrote:

<quoted text>
The incident in reference here happened in 1981 or 82 and it was funny, then and now. It was an old outhouse they put at the stop sign. As for the current incident, I don't find the burning of government property funny, however, if my "family" was an innocent bystander, along for the ride, and didn't assist in burning of the outhouse, why should he be in trouble? They are entirely two different matters. One is funny and one is not. Too bad your too immature to be able to tell the difference.

if he bradley is the one with the vehicle how would that make him a innocent bystander or just along for the ride!!bradley could have got in HIS truck and left.and was you there.how do you know he didn'tassist in burning in burning the outhouse!and yes he should be in just as much trouble as jason.And you are the biggest back stabbing crippled up bit*h.Bradley you need to keep this family member close to you cuz.she is on your side ,but she does carry a knife

[finallysomepeace]

WHAT wrote:

<quoted text>if he bradley is the one with the vehicle how would that make him a innocent bystander or just along for the ride!!bradley could have got in HIS truck and left.and was you there.how do you know he didn'tassist in burning in burning the outhouse!and yes he should be in just as much trouble as jason.And you are the biggest back stabbing crippled up bit*h.Bradley you need to keep this family member close to you cuz.she is on your side ,but she does carry a knife

I believe you might actually be crazy. I previously stated I didn't know if he was or wasn't involved. And as far as "being along for the ride" I didn't mean literally. You're not very bright are you? If Bradley was involved freely of his own will, then he should be punished. If however, he didn't participate then he shouldn't be punished. Pretty simple, even someone with a simple mind as your own should be able to understand that.

[finallysomepeace]

Here's a thought: Jason is in trouble, Bradley is not; apparently the law figured out who was responsible and who wasn't.

[finallysomepeace]

Today's current local newspaper indicates that Jason admitted to being the one who set the fire. Apparently he did not implicate Bradley.

[WHAT]

finallysomepeace wrote:

Here's a thought: Jason is in trouble, Bradley is not; apparently the law figured out who was responsible and who wasn't.

SNITCH!

[what]

i thought you could give us some more info. on this case, but you have not! your's and bradleys storys are rehursted

[finallysomepeace]

what wrote:

i thought you could give us some more info. on this case, but you have not! your's and bradleys storys are rehursted

I haven't spoken to Bradley in probably over a year. You are just plum crazy! If you want more info, read the paper, or better yet, call the Sheriff's dept.