Jamestown Man Charged with Arson and Criminal Mischief
William El Blakey faces charges stemming from a Prendergast Avenue fire.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 2, 2026, 4:16 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 2, 2026, 4:23 a.m. ET
Jamestown Man Charged with Arson and Criminal Mischief
William El Blakey, 38, of Jamestown, has been charged with third-degree arson and second-degree criminal mischief. The charges allege that Blakey ignited a mattress located on the lower porch of a structure, and the resulting fire spread throughout the building, causing significant damage. As this is only a charge, Blakey is presumed innocent until proven guilty in court. Sentencing has not yet been scheduled.
Sep 2, 2026, 4:16 a.m. ETFirst report
Jamestown Man Charged with Arson After Prendergast Avenue Fire
A Jamestown man has been charged in connection with a fire that caused significant damage to a building, according to the Post-Journal.
William El Blakey, 38, of Jamestown, is charged with third-degree arson and second-degree criminal mischief, the Post-Journal reported. The charges stem from an investigation by Jamestown police officers and city fire investigators, who allege Blakey ignited a mattress on the lower porch of the structure, and the resulting fire spread throughout the building.
The matter is at the charging stage and has not been resolved. Blakey has been charged but not yet tried, and as with all criminal charges, he is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- City man charged with arson after Prendergast Avenue firepost-journal.com
Revision history
- Version 12 Sept 2026, 08:23current
First published.
- Version 12 Sept 2026, 08:16current
First published.
- Version 12 Sept 2026, 08:25current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.