Stamford Fire Investigation Continues; Police Interview Michael Borcina

STAMFORD, Conn. (CBSNewYork) — The investigation continues into the deadly Christmas Day fire that killed three young sisters and their grandparents in Stamford.

Sources tell CBS 2 News that Michael Borcina was interviewed Monday night by Stamford police in his lawyer’s office.

Borcina and homeowner Madonna Badger were the only survivors of the blaze.

Investigators believe Borcina may have accidentally started the lethal blaze by placing fireplace embers in the mudroom of the Victorian-style home.

Officials said Borcina jumped out of the building and told firefighters that he had led the children down to the second floor. However, the heat of the blaze had apparently driven the children and grandparents back up to the third floor.

Badger’s parents, Lomer and Pauline Johnson, and her three daughters, 9-year-old Lily and 7-year-old twins Sarah and Grace, were killed.

All of the victims died of smoke inhalation. Lomer Johnson, 71, also suffered blunt trauma to the head and neck.

Johnson had stepped out onto the roof of the home and fell through the rafters to the ground below. Investigators say he spent his last moments trying desperately to save his grandchildren.

Badger was interviewed by police last week.


One Comment

  1. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Think Mayor Pavia and the City Building Department have some serious explaining to do.

  2. Deborah Jeffries says:


  3. Deborah Jeffries says:

    According to an anonymous source cited on several websites from the PD, they weren’t notified of the demolition though Conklin won’t confirm. I don’t believe they knew because it was a crime scene that had critical forensic evidence.

    1. Suzette says:

      Deborah, this is looking very bad for B & B.

      1. Francis Ford says:

        I totally agree here deborah and yes it dosnt look like conklin knew about it, so now it comes down to: who really wears the pants in stamford? the police? fire? buildings dept? the mayor? the mob? i cant say as i dont live there.

        1. Suzette says:

          Francis, here’s a link. It doesn’t add anything new to what you and Deborah have been discussing:

          1. Francis Ford says:


            “However, there are now questions about just how thorough that probe can be with nothing left of the house.” YUP.

            “The New York Post, citing unnamed sources says Stamford police were NOT consulted before the Victorian mansion was torn down in the days following the deadly fire.” yup

            “Along with the house evidence of a possible crime could also now be gone.”

            How much more unfair to the victims of this fire can this be?

            1. Francis Ford says:

              Maybe they can beat the truth out of that buildings dept guy? seriously doubt it.

            2. NYC10009 says:

              Awful! Can you post the link to this story? Thanks.

  4. Deborah Jeffries says:

    What really matters most is getting justice for the five victims of this fire. The only way that will happen is prosecuting the people who caused it. Do the right thing Conklin so their deaths aren’t in vain.

    1. Francis Ford says:

      Looks like Conklin is maybe left holding an empty bag of evidence. This thug was slick and has his friends in all the right places. Imagine how you would feel now if you were one of the people (“customers” of B) still holding a judgement against B? You might actually be very happy you were one of the “lucky” ones and he didnt burn your whole house down with your relatives in it. Think Conkiln is red with anger?

  5. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Prosecutors, if the charges are filed, will in all probability interview them separately. If they think one is more culpable than the other, they may offer the less culpable suspect a plea deal to turn State’s evidence against the other.

    1. Francis Ford says:

      good thinking

  6. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Five counts of second degree reckless manslaughter would likely carry a thirty year sentence suspended after twenty with a ten year probation but is at the Judge’s discretion so he could get less time.

  7. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Francis, I didn’t mean that he actually WOULD cover for her. I meant that he would say whatever he could to get out of it because of what a weasel he is. If he’s charged with five counts of second degree manslaughter, that would be at least a twenty year sentence in CT.

  8. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Nail file may not be necessary because she may find herself charged too. Not defending Borcina, but it would be grossly unfair if only he was charged. You can bet if that happens, he will say she dumped the embers and he was covering for her.

    1. Francis Ford says:

      deborah if you read about all his misdeeds you get the idea he is not the type of stand up guy to take the all the credit for the wrongdoing. Look for his lhigh powered awyer to blame everyone else IF he gets charged and Ill bet that will includes M. ……as far as her helping him out of the slammer? i laughed at your nail file line but seriously i think too many lawyers are going to kill the mood of this love fest altho we never know as stupidity knows know bounds when it comes to love.

      1. NYC10009 says:

        If the cops could get each of them alone without their lawyers present and use hard-core interrogation tactics, they probably could get them to crack and spill the beans on each other. But unfortunately, their lawyers are going to pull out all the stops to prevent that from happening. Those two spineless characters are narcissists, and their own ass will always come first. I definitely could see him changing his story and blaming the fire on her if he’s charged.

        1. NYC10009 says:

          * “asses,” that is.

    2. Suzette says:

      He probably already has told his pricey lawyer that. That would be the same lawyer to whom she likely handed a big, fat check. Her narcissistic world is going to come apart, if the carpenter boyfriend/ arsonist turns on his golden goose to save his own hide.

    3. Francis Ford says:

      i am wondering about those embers after all this news how bad B is.
      was that just a story made up by him too ya think? hes clearly a con man type.
      so why confess to such stupidity as putting hot embers in a bag when that will land you with manslaughter charges?
      he is such a weasel that i wonder if he lied about the embers too. and yes he will say she did it, not him, or something like that if he is charged. but now i wonder if they both did something else? i also think he ‘red flagged’ himself by having the house torn down so fast because it is so obvious he needed to cover up something and it must have been something pretty significant. this story will continue to shift and develop for awhile. i sure hope we get the truth one of these days.

      1. NYC10009 says:

        I posted this on the other thread, but it could be that Madonna did toss out the embers, but they agreed that he’d take the blame because she is in the middle of the divorce proceedings. She knows that she’d lost all the assets she shares with her husband if she is held accountable for the death of their children, not to mention the damage to her “reputation.” In return for her BF’s admission of guilt, he is handsomely compensated by her, and they continue to show the world they’re a couple. So II believe yes, that is indeed a likely scenario. But the second he is charged, there’s no way he’d stick to that story and would try to save his own ass.

        Can’t wait for 48 Hours or Dateline to air this one!

        1. NYC10009 says:

          Typo: “lose” all the assets she shares….

        2. Suzette says:

          NYC, I completely agree with you.

          And, bravo for your comment today to the Badger and Borcina bully defender. Too bad that on every forum there are nuts who are so skewed in their thinking, they leap to the defense of other nuts – in this case, the pair responsible for an inferno that killed five people.

          1. Francis Ford says:

            What I can never understand is any people coming on here (or onto any other public board) and trying to tell others what they can and cannot say (or should and should not say) as if they have that right or authority. When these types don’t get what they want, they often turn into outright bullies and yet they often criticize the others of the bullying! They then turn often to trying to “shaming” the writer into submission, as if that will work. It’s total “projection” on their part but they don’t seem to be able to own it or understand it.

            1. Suzette says:

              Exactly, Francis. Intimidation did not work, so next the bully tried to “shame” us into silence. When it posted, “This is none of your business,” I almost laughed at its lack of insight. My immediate thought was Badger chose to have that very public, attention seeking funeral! Those bizarre images of her clinging to the man responsible for ending her childrens’ lives had much to do with the shift in public opinion against her.

          2. NYC10009 says:

            Yup, they’re in the Reverse Universe. And they have no BS detectors! So they only judge events extremely superficially.

  9. Deborah Jeffries says:

    What’s sickening is if he’s arrested and bail is set, guess what socialite of NYC will be right there with her checkbook and pen in hand?

    1. NYC10009 says:

      And baking him cakes with nail files inside.

      1. Francis Ford says:

        oops sorry i mean YOUR nail file line not deborah’s!

  10. Deborah Jeffries says:

    OH YES! Thanks for the link Frances. I know Conklin, if he mentions criminal charges that is probably the announcement that’s coming by week’s end I bet.

  11. patty cake says:

    This guy was bad news and criminal and she was a bad mother… typical selfish narcississitc career driven rich horror story.. had to be with some guy on xmas eve , a family event.. she sucks. Her stupid boytoy and her selfishness killed her family. This is what happens when adults care more about themselves than their children.

  12. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Bottom line if there were battery powered detectors, they would’ve escaped. The source is probably a friend of hers. Not authentic.

    1. NYC10009 says:

      I don’t buy it either.

  13. Deborah Jeffries says:

    Bottom line if there were battery powered detectors, they would’ve survived. If this source (probably her friend or relative) is willing to give a formal statement to police under penalty for false testimony, then I wouldn’t question the authenticity though some people do lie.

    1. Francis Ford says:

      if they did have any working smoke detectors guess where they were located?

      1. Suzette says:

        Exactly. They would have been downstairs, where the two survivors were shacked up. Had there been any smoke detectors on the upper floors, the children and grandparents would not have died.

Comments are closed.

More From CBS New York


Listen Live