WHITE CLOUD, Mich. —
A father and son duo may get separate trials after they were accused of setting their family restaurant on fire. David and Robinson’s attorneys said there may not be enough evidence to say it was arson.
David Robinson, 50, is charged with arson of an insured real property, while Ryan Robinson, 30, is facing arson of an insured real property (20 years) and two counts of false pretenses (15 years).
According to police, the two men were business partners and owners of Charlie's Family Grill at 276 S. Charles Street in White Cloud. The business was destroyed in a fire in March 2023.
Ryan Robinson’s attorney asked the judge to do separate trials for Ryan’s arson and false pretenses charges.
"They're separate instances. They're separate things,” his attorney said. “They're not, they've not alleged to be arson.”
Both Robinson’s attorneys had issues over witnesses and evidence, with them saying there wasn’t clear evidence of an ignition source that could point to arson.
During a preliminary hearing in December of last year, fire investigator Douglas Gauthier from a Grand Rapids-based firm said his investigation had caused him to believe that the fire was intentionally set.
Gauthier said there were three definitive origin points of the fire, and that fires in the basement and attic of the building were not connected. He also described his investigation as finding little food and cooking equipment inside the restaurant at the time of the fire.
Ryan Robinson’s attorney said if experts, specifically Gauthier, can’t prove how the fire started, they shouldn’t be allowed to say it was arson.
"My understanding is he's going to take the witness stand and testify that, ‘Hey, this was an arson because we excluded all these other things,’" the attorney said.
The prosecution countered that statement, saying the defense cherry-picked from hundreds of pages of documents.
"It's very clear that it was cherry-picked,” she said. “There were only a few things taken and it was taken out of context in a review of the entire record from the preliminary examination, I believe that it is clear that there was probable cause."
One of the biggest motions was separating David Robinson’s trial from his son’s because they face different charges.
“I think any jury might get confused because they have the same last name that, that connection father and son, the jury will be there's no instruction this court is going to give this,” said the attorney. “[The prosecution] talked about the doctrine of chances. Exactly, exactly. What are the chances of the jury hears that Mr. David Robinson is connected to his son. His son is at three fires within a year. The likelihood of him receiving a fair trial is impossible.”
The judge did not make a decision during the hearing, saying he needs more time to review what was submitted.