Deutsche Bank fire and its business impacts

Deutsche Bank Fire

Reasons of the Fire

Impacts of the Fire: The Investigations

The Charged Culprits

Arguments of the Prosecutors

Arguments of the Defense Lawyers

Reactions of the Families of the Firefighters

The year 2007 was the year when most of the New Yorkers were remembering the terrorist attack on the world trade center six years ago. This is the year, month being of August when no one was expecting another tragedy when half-damaged building of Deutsche Bank in New York faced a disaster. The fire had started in the building at ground zero and the impact of the fire was so high that seven alarms quickly started sounding (WetFeet 45). The building of the bank had already suffered damage because of the attack on the world trade center when during the attacks, the southern tower of the world trade center collapsed on the building. Even though the impact was high and the shock had great momentum, the building suffered the damage and was standing after the shock for almost six years. One of the main facts that are also to be highlighted here is that the building had also suffered the demolitions efforts that were started immediately after the attacks, which for some people was quiet odd. At this point, it was seen that the 40-story building was still contaminated with the debris from the impact of the southern tower from the neighboring building. In order to remove the contamination and the debris, the authorities had started demolition effort from the top of the effected building. For making the demolition attempts more successful, acetylene torches were used to cut through the steel beams and to disassemble the structure of the main building (Malone 2011). The fire hindered the process when the demolition of the 26th floor was started

At this point, it was seen that there were more than seven hazardous substances in the building. These substances included dioxin, chromium, as well as lead in addition to asbestos. In this case, it has been reported that the detoxification as well as the demolition work required sealing of each floor with barriers made of plywood and polyurethane sheets to make sure that the places and the floors were cleaned before demolition. The reports have highlighted that when the fire broke out and firefighters went inside the building to kill the fire, they found themselves surrounded by an increased amount of substances that could burn up any second to multiply the fire. One of the main facts that need to be highlighted here is that as these hazardous fire casing materials were present in the bank building, there was no fire safe plan being adopted by the building at the time of demolition. Based on this main mistake the fire fighters had no clue how to deal with the sealed off stairwells and the sealed containers of hazardous materials

It is important to highlight here that the impact of the fire was increasing as it ate every floor of the bank building, most importantly in the presence of the hazardous materials on the floors. In this situation, it has been reported that the failure of fire fighters was inevitable. Most of the fire fighters that went inside the building were immediately taken off by intense smoke and by the time, they could start fighting the smoke, their respirators ran out. One of the most important facts that make this event more important is that two fire fighters lost their lives during their fight against the fire (Lovins, Odum and Rowe 56). A firefighter since 8 years, Brooklyn-based 33 years old Joseph Graffagnino lost his life in the event. Second firefighter was an important firefighter from New York working for than 23 years, 53-year-old Robert Beddia

Commissioner Scoppetta added that the fire was very difficult and the level of difficulty was also increased because of the presence of asbestos in the building. Second main factor was that the building was under the process of demolition. According to the commissioner, the presence and use of asbestos in the building was under constant monitoring. He highlighted that when fire started in the building, one of the civil employees noticed it because of the smoke. The employee immediately notified an elevator operator after which the fire was discovered at the 17th floor after which the firefighters were contacted. With more than 87 units and 475 firefighters, the fire was becoming difficult to handle as every minute passed (Li 2011).

Reasons of the Fire

Reports and investigations have highlighted that more than just a single reason is involved in causing the fire in Deutsche Bank in New York. Timings of the firefighters were slow and the investigations have highlighted that more than required time was given to the fire to explode and consume the whole building. After the call to the firefighters was made, from then it took almost 80 minutes to put the first drop of water on the fire to kill it. More than 13 minutes were wasted by the civil employees, working in the bank building, to call [HIDDEN] Thirdly, the employees gave inaccurate information to the firefighters about accurate working of the emergency equipment at the site

Communication lapses have been counted as one of the most important reasons in the complete destruction caused by the fire. The firefighting response was supposed to be quick but it was delayed based on the communication lapse as the complete failure of the walkie-talkies at the site of the emergency, and unattended and unheard calls for help. When the firefighters arrived at the site, they could spot and figure out nothing but utter confusion

. The two firefighters who lost their lives in the incident were spotted by one of the colleagues who had to crawl to the edge of the building to spot the firefighters trapped at the stairwell when the radio connections had given up at the site of fire (Italiano 2011).

According to the findings of the investigation team, the fire is an evidence of a complete failure of the operations department of the firefighters as well as the bank. The building was originally composed of 41 stories and after the demolition and asbestos abatement procedures was left with 26 stories. After the fire consumed half of the building, it was nothing but a pile of construction debris

. During asbestos abatement procedures, the contractors had hung thick and big plastic bags to contain the asbestos from the basement and higher floors of the building.

Impacts of the Fire: The Investigations

The fire has not only been the reason of the deaths of two most important lives of the New York fire department but it has also caused a great stir in the justice system. Many questions have been raised and many fingers are pointing. There is no doubt about the fact that the impact has been realized very late but the impact has been higher. During the investigations, some of the main exposures that have been made in the case include that of criminal negligence, and incompetence. It has been added that as the bank authorities ignored the most important safety regulations. In that way it will be considered as criminal. It has been included that the absence and a complete negligence in the provision of the functioning standpipes for the provision of water in the hoses is also criminal negligence (Eligon 2011). Secondly, the government agencies have also been added by highlighting that the involved government agencies have been involved in commenting to avoid any liabilities that are proven from the evidences of large-scale corruption and involvement in organized crimes

The event has exposed more than just the building backbone structure, which are now rubbles. Increased political as well as financial interests in the event have been exposed by the event that is defined by the lives of two firefighters. Investigations have highlighted that the political as well as the financial interests were associated and linked with the official praises made for the firefighters who lost their lives and in the discussions carried out on the even itself. Investigations have further highlighted that the firefighters were both the victims as well as the culprits in the tragedy

The Charged Culprits

The investigation has highlighted that the main culprits involved in this case are the three construction supervisors; Salvatore DePaola, Mitchell Alvo, and Jeffrey Melofchik working on the project of the building demolition. During the trial, the prosecutors have highlighted that if it were not for the criminal negligence of the trio of construction workers in the building, the two firefighters would have been alive. Melofchik was one of the most senior officials charged for the deaths of the firefighters. After two months of consistent testimonies and court decisions, DePaola and Melofchik were acquitted from all the charges on June 2011. Justice Rena K. Uviller of Manhattan's State Supreme Court will decide upon the third defendant, also the director of abatement, Mitchell Alvo along with the John Galt Corporation that is also charged (Bureau of National Affairs 45).

One of the main reasons that have been highlighted by the prosecutors is that the pressure to clear up the asbestos from the basement was intense and the contractors were constantly being forced to finish the work. Because of an increased pressure, the contractors and the workers working under the contractors were working in a miscalculated manner. One of the wrong decisions that were made by the contractors was to ignore the broken water pipe in one of the floors being demolished. This has been highlighted as evidence by the District Attorney Joel Seidemann in one of his closing arguments at the trial that had been going on since two months in the Manhattan Supreme Court

Other than the three contractors, the third party that had been under investigation for more than 16 months was the New York City itself. In this case, the court mentioned that the city authority has failed to outline the rules to safeguard the building. The court decided in December 2008 that the city was not to be indicted or charged for the damage caused to the building based on the fact that many legal obstacles could be expected afterwards (Association of Fire Chiefs International 30).

The company, Bovis Lend Lease that hired the subcontractor to work in the former bank building has also not to be indicted. Bovis Lend Lease was responsible for the removal of asbestos and demotion of the floors of the bank

Arguments of the Prosecutors

In this case, an important question that was raised by the prosecutor was that if the deaths of the firefighters were only because of the terrible circumstances that awaited them or was there any involvement of the criminal negligence and conspiracy. Defense lawyer Edward Little added that the deaths may have been caused because of greed and conspiracy planned by highly irresponsible people who were less concerned about the lives of firefighters.

The three construction supervisors are now facing charges of manslaughter, homicide based on criminal negligence, and last one being reckless endangerment. Another party that has been also involved is the company involved in recruiting the three construction supervisors in the bank, John Galt Corp. The trial has highlighted that the three men were used as a scapegoat in the case of an inspection of the building for the presence of hazardous materials in the building. In addition to this, it has been highlighted by the District Attorney that the broken standpipe left ignored by the three construction workers was the main reason of an unavailability of water for the firefighters. As important evidence, the statements given by many firefighters on the stand have shown that the most crucial element was the water that was supposed to be supplied by the standpipe (Bureau of National Affairs 65).

Arguments of the Defense Lawyers

It has been claimed by the defense lawyers that the firefighters were not the employees of the building and they could not be expected to be aware of the broken standpipe. Thereby the unavailability of the water is not the main factor involved in the death of two firefighters. In addition, the defense lawyers argued that the features that were used to contain some of the highlighted hazardous materials in the buildings were there for destruction of the floors that was also under the sole awareness of the bank itself and under the accidental circumstances of the fire, the features became the obstacles itself. They argued that an additional factor that has been highlighted by the prosecutors include the air that played an important role in spreading the fire. As a reply to this, defense lawyers have argued that the air cannot be counted as a factor of the casualties along with the sealed stairwells

It has been added that the contractors have years of experience and it is implausible to think that they were unaware of an importance of the standpipe even in the presence of hazardous substances on the floors.

The defense lawyers had argued that the three men who were charged were the scapegoats. Three days before Christmas, when the district attorney of Manhattan announced the indictments, Robert M. Morgenthau, a settlement with the New York City was also announced. The New York City admitted that carelessness was made in the proper inspection of the building by the Fire and Buildings Departments. Based on the announcement of the settlements, the city announced that it would make major changes that are needed in the procedures of construction inspection

Reactions of the Families of the Firefighters

On December 8, 2008, the prosecutors briefed the families of the firefighters about the case. The first complaint that was made public by the families of the firefighters was that they could not see justice being done to their families. This reaction was based on the court decision of not indicting the city and Bovis Lend Lease. In the initial stages of the case, Bovis Lend Lease made an offer for the damages to the families that highly offended the families. The offer made by Bovis Lend Lease was seen as a way to negotiate with the prosecutors and also a way to cleanly walk out of the case. But later in the month it was seen that the families reached an agreement with Bovis Lend Lease to accept an offer of U.S.$5 million. With this the main condition that was put on Bovis Lend Lease by the families was that even they are paying for the damages, they will not be barred from pursuing the civil lawsuit against the New York city, John Galt Corporation or Bovis Lend Lease

Bovis Lend Lease had hired the John Galt Corporation for the removal of asbestos as well as the demolition of the former bank building in New York under the sole authority of state development officials. An important fact that has been highlighted by the case prosecutors is that the John Galt Corporation is based on an amalgamation of the executives of two different companies that have had no previous experience in construction.