5/26/2018 Ltr to Kidde, 2,29,11
1/3
February 29, 2011
Mr. James P. WardPresident and General Manager
Walter-Kidde Portable Equipment, Inc
1016 Corporate Park Drive
Mebane, NC 27302
Subject: THE SMOKE DETECTOR FRAUD
Dear President Ward:
I am responding to your letter to me dated January 3, 2011 which
was a response to my letter to
Mr. Louis Chenevert, Chairman and CEO of United Technologies
Corporation, the parentcorporation of Kidde.
I enclose a smoke detector ad that I previously provided to Mr.
Chenevert (enclosed with thereferenced letter). This ad (dated July
1969) which was circulated to fire chiefs across the United
States within the F ire Journalof the National Fire Protection
Association Note that the ad has a
picture of a firefighter holding a hose and presumably attacking
a fire. The ad says, FIGHT FIRE
. . . the easy way . . . before it starts. This ad was one piece
if misinformation during a 15 yearlong campaign by a number of
smoke detector manufacturers intent on convincing the fire
chiefs of America that the device being sold would warn of a
fire before f lames or smoke would
appear.
Honeywell said it in a slightly different way. A Honeywell ad
(dated July 1972 within the Fire
Journal) said, The new detectors see unseen particles of
combustion . . . in a fires incipient
stage. The stage when you can do something about i t! . . .
before smoke, fl ames and heat bui ld
up. Before sprinklers are activated.
There were many such ads beginning during 1965 until 1980.
During this time there also were
technical reports published that presumably gave the scientific
explanation of how ions areemitted by a combustible being heated
and how this supposed super fire detector could detect
these emitted ion and sound an alarm even before an actual fire,
or even the smoke occurred.
Eventually the performance lies were believed by the fire chiefs
and they began to help sell thedevice and solicit the legislators
to mandate the installation of these devices in homes.
These performance lies were disproved by the Dunes Tests of
1974. However, the data provingthe device to be incapable of
performing as claimed was buried at the rear of the report and
the
5/26/2018 Ltr to Kidde, 2,29,11
2/3
research engineers lied about the results of the tests. Indeed,
the smoky fires usually required in
excess of an hour to detect the smoke and often failed to sound
at all during the testing in real
homes. What this proved is that not only were the fire chiefs
lied to; when the truth began tosurface there was a deliberate (and
I say criminal) cover-up. It is my estimate, based on federal
loss data, approximately 35 to 40 thousand children have so far
burned to death in homes
containing the ionization devices where they failed to perform
as advertised or not at all.
A friend and retired judge explained to me that the false
performance claims, the falsified testing
(both in the field and at Underwriters Laboratories and the
cover-up of the consequences equate
to felonies. Also, he claimed that when deaths result from a
felony the perpetrators can becharged with murder. Also he claimed
that all persons who cooperate in the fraud (crime) can be
considered equally guilty. That appears to say that those within
the Kidde organization who
originally joined the conspirators deceiving the fire chiefs
(and the public via the chiefs) public
and those who are still covering up the crimes could be
considered part and parcel of the fraud.
Within your January 3, 2011 letter you imply that Kidde was not
at fault because at the time that
Kidde was not manufacturing any of the ionization type smoke
detectors. I find that to besomewhat like the accused perpetrator
who claims that he should not be tried for shooting that
man because the gun was made by others. You say that both the
NFPA and NIST have
consistently claimed that the devices will perform. That is not
surprising because NIST was the
agency that conducted the Dunes tests of 1974 and deliberately
falsified the testing to hide thedefe cts of the device. Yes, NFPA,
NIST, USFA and the CPSC all are reluctant to admit that they
were conned by the smoke detector industry, as were the fire
chiefs. Once the manufacturers of
the ionization device were able to sell their performance lies
to all involved, there was areluctance to tell the public the truth
because the outrage would also fall upon those who were
paid to protect the public and ended up betraying the people. I
guess the lesson here is if you plan
to defraud the public it is best to get the government agencies
helping to promote the fraud. Then
government will also be reluctant to let the truth out.
What has happened during the past five or more years is that a
very profitable fraud that has
killed an incredible number of children is coming unraveled. Now
there is many who no longerfear to speak the truth. The facts and
details of this deadly fraud are on the internet. Thus it is
becoming most difficult to hide the crimes. So, I guess that all
you can do now to save face is to
say it is, the other guy who made me do it. However, because the
children are still dying andthe phony fire detectors are still in
about 90 million homes; it would seem (based on the
information received from my legal friend) that those who
continue the cover-up today must be
considered to be part and parcel of this deadly fraud. For this
reason (and others) I believe that it
would be wise for Kidde to initiate a campaign of honesty and
begin to advise the public that the
smoke detectors in their homes are defective and that if a fire
occurs they may not warn in timeto escape. Also, an honest fire
alarm company would realize that the corruption that is part of
the
NFPA code system has been incredibly deadly in other ways as
well. An honest fire detection
company would stop complying with the corrupt NFPA code and
produce an honest code thatincluded reliable fire detectors(smoke
and heat) within an honest fire code.
