01-24-2015, 05:43 AM #1
Naked child victim's circus blaze pic removed
The story at Daily Mail link:
'I was worried her soul would never rest': Fire captain criticized for 'poor judgement' after
removing naked photos of dead girl, 8, killed in a 1944 circus blaze from the walls of his firehouse
⁍ The big top fire at the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus in July 1944 is one of the worst fires in American history
⁍ A photo of eight-year-old victim Eleanor Cook was on wall of the Hartford Fire Department engine 14 station for years
⁍ 167 people died and 700 were injured in the blaze
⁍ Outgoing Captain William Pond took it down and destroyed the picture
⁍ He said it was 'publicly displaced in this horrific manner'
⁍ Incoming Captain Carlos Huertas said the decision was 'poor judgement'
01-24-2015, 05:41 PM #2
Myself and some others have posted to the Hartford Fire Department Facebook page to show support for their retiring fire captain, Mr. William Pond. I believe it was a good and decent thing to do and I am glad that he had the intestinal fortitude to destroy that picture!
I feel it hard to believe that a picture of a poor little naked girl should ever have been publicly displayed at a firehouse and how their new captain has a problem with the destruction of that photo is rather disturbing.
This is their Facebook page if anyone is interested in posting something to show respect for Mr. Pond and the honorable and decent thing that he did.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hartf...90562870987552I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
01-24-2015, 05:53 PM #3
I disagree, crystalgenie, but great post.
01-24-2015, 06:03 PM #4
01-24-2015, 06:15 PM #5
01-24-2015, 11:29 PM #6
They have tons of other pictures of the fire,in fire department, and around Hartford but no one but them were displaying the child's body, I heard... (info from friends in Hartford) I realize it is history but I don't think a dead, naked body of a child or anyone should be on display, that is just me. I have problem with death and dead bodies. I do not attend funerals.
I respect your opinion though and always like your posts.I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
01-25-2015, 12:54 AM #7
Pond explained in the email how he first felt the images were inappropriate when he started at the firehouse as a young man, and that his feelings continued up until becoming captain in 2011.
'When originally assigned to engine 14 in the summer of 1990 I objected to the naked deceased pictures of Eleanor Cook displayed in the hallway,' Pond said in the email.
'I objected verbally to every house Captain through my career where my efforts proved fruitless.
'My first order of business as house Captain was to remove them from display.'
No firefighter, much less seasoned captain need the grim reminders. Their own personal visions are enough. How difficult his career in the service...to view the naked child's demise...each day at the station. Captain Pond made his own peace, in his own fireplace.
Rest in peace, Eleanor Cook.Peace is flowing like a river,
Flowing out through you and me,
Spreading out into the desert,
Setting all the captives free.
01-25-2015, 01:24 AM #8
The problem with this sort of logic is -- when does it stop, this need to censor history and cut down fact to a size with which one individual is comfortable? At what expense? For instance, I have a small picture case, about 8" x 5", wood with a glass frame and, pasted at back, the piece's provenance -- a letter from the 1840s describing what it contains inside: a small charcoal ember from a structure burned in London's hellish conflagration in 1666: the Great Fire. It is a piece of history no one has a right to destroy regardless of where it is displayed -- publicly or privately; regardless of the great human suffering -- the deaths, the homelessness -- it caused as it raced north and destroyed St. Paul's and all other structures in its path along the Thames. Whether image or relic, one must not destroy the past. Let the dead bury the dead. We, the living, must always realize the delicacy of life, and thus its sanctity; the terrible cost of our shared history must never be contained.
01-25-2015, 01:28 AM #9What a Kerfuffle...
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
I don't want the pictures of the Holocaust destroyed.
I have taught my 11 year old daughter's about the Holocaust.
However, it doesn't mean they need to be displayed in public either.
I have not shown my children PICTURES of the bodies in the Holocaust yet.
I don't believe they are ready to see that and I should choose when they do.
My friend just had her son's birthday party at a fire station.
Kids tour the fire station for field trips quite frequently.
What if a child had seen that picture? How traumatizing for that child.
01-25-2015, 11:22 PM #10
Statement from Chief Carlos Huertas:
Soon-to-be-retired Captain William Pond exercised poor judgment in removing photos from the quarters of Engine Co. 14. He has demonstrated a lack of professionalism in his decision to take matters in to his own hands and circumvented the process put forth to better handle the situation. The photos removed were found to be copied and have no intrinsic value. However, I will be taking the necessary actions to ensure the situation continues to be investigated in its entirety.
Last edited by Crimson clover; 01-25-2015 at 11:36 PM.Peace is flowing like a river,
Flowing out through you and me,
Spreading out into the desert,
Setting all the captives free.
01-26-2015, 12:54 AM #11
On display in a firehouse is not the place for that pic. After all, naked children are not appropriate for display (except for the bare bottomed babies whose genitals are not showing). If I were to take naked pics of a 4 year old girl and send them to you, I could be arrested for child porn. It is the "naked child" aspect of this pic that is really the most objectionable, along with the fact that nudity and severe injuries in pic usually have a "graphic" warning so that people who don't want to see such things can avoid them.
I speak as a wife of a former ass't chief. I have just spoke with him (not even telling him the story of the cap't who removed the pic). He said " It is NOT appropriate. It is disrespectful to the child and her family. It is against policy to display or distribute images (or info) of patients. Naked pics on display in a firehouse are simply not appropriate. We have children who tour the firehouse and should not be subjected to that. This shouldn't even be a question. Just NO!"
Pretty much the entire reason that this picture exists is because she was an unidentified victim of a famous, huge fire with many causalities. She has long since been identified and is laid to rest with a tombstone bearing her name. This pic should have been laid to rest long ago too (and really never publicly displayed like that at all).SwampMama
Cyrus C. convicted of 2004 arson in Harvey, La. that killed 4 people, including his 19-month-old daughter, his teenage girlfriend, the girlfriend's mom and GF's young brother (age 11). He was acquitted in 2008 (state charges) in 2008 and found GUILTY (federal charges) in 2013
02-07-2015, 10:25 AM #12"If you are lucky enough to find a way of life you love, you have to find the courage to live it."
- John Irving in A Prayer for Owen Meany
Unless I provide a link or refer to a specific link, all my ramblings are theories, speculation, scenarios based on what info is available and my own unique life experiences.
02-07-2015, 10:54 AM #13
What a sad tragedy. After reading this thread I was lost for days on the internet and read everything I could. So, How do we know he actually burned it? Why take it all the way home to destroy it? No shredder in the office? I hope he wasn't "attached" to the photo. My mind does go there.
10-30-2015, 06:14 PM #14
Original Little Miss 1565 photos are safe
According to Fire Chief Huertas the photo Pond burned was just a copy. All the original pictures of Little Miss 1565 are safe. His statement is given here (with the actual picture included) and there are follow-up articles.
There's just a little bit of a problem with this story. I've been reading some posts on a blog from Hartford newsman Kevin Brookman, and comments being made by others who appear to know the situation.
The photo of Little Miss 1565 that was on display at Station 14 does not show her naked. It is the famous shot of just her face. There is another picture I have seen which is full length and she has a sleeveless white gown. I don't know how anyone could possibly interpret these pictures as "naked". I am sure nude shots were taken at the morgue for ID, but those would never be made part of a memorial display.
Apparently, William Pond was a known troublemaker and this was something he did out of spite after a failed attempt to collect workmen's comp for a non-work-related injury.
I would love to get verification of this. I "adopted" this kid (along with Elsie Paroubek) years ago, my fellow Websleuths will know what I mean -- and whether or not she is Eleanor Cook, I have a "jury's still out" attitude; I think the truth will someday be known.
And I just have to say... ye gods, the kid died in a fire and he burned her effigy? I mean instead of burying it?, or... I have no words.
Last edited by Bluejay_Young; 10-30-2015 at 06:25 PM. Reason: adding fire chief's comment
10-30-2015, 09:14 PM #15"In a time of universal deceit -- telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
By wfgodot in forum Up to the MinuteReplies: 12Last Post: 06-18-2012, 07:26 PM
By mysteriew in forum Crimes in the NewsReplies: 1Last Post: 01-23-2006, 11:39 PM