Meet In CommonNews

Local

Woonsocket man faces arson, insurance fraud charges tied to 2025 fire

Meet in Common connects news with real conversations. Use ThinkMatch to arrange a Roundtable and meet people to discuss this story.

Source: Daily Republic

WOONSOCKET, S.D. — An 83-year-old Woonsocket man faces two felony charges after prosecutors accused him of setting a fire to damage property and collect insurance proceeds. Wayne T. Feistner is charged with second-degree arson and fraudulent insurance acts in Sanborn County. Both charges are Class 4 felonies, according to a criminal complaint filed in the Third Judicial Circuit. The complaint alleges Feistner started a fire or caused an explosion on or about July 20, 2025, with the intent to damage property and collect insurance proceeds. The second charge alleges he knowingly presented, caused to be presented or prepared statements in support of an insurance claim that contained false, incomplete or misleading material information, with the intent to defraud or deceive. An arrest warrant was issued for Feistner on Oct. 7. He was released on a personal recognizance bond and is scheduled to make his initial court appearance Nov. 16.

This excerpt comes from the named source. Read the original for the full reporting.

Read the original at Daily Republic

Featured places to meet in Palo Alto, CA

Explore these places and arrange a conversation through ThinkMatch.

Yutori

Yutori 3375 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA, 94306 US

Cafe Riace

Cafe Riace 200 Sheridan Avenue Palo Alto, CA, US

City guide for Palo Alto, CA

Community Poll

Protecting natural places can justify limiting visitor numbers.

Share your view, then see how readers voted. No sign-in required. This poll is shared across stories.

Do you agree or disagree?

Choose one answer

Common Quandary

A Common Quandary to discuss

Another conversation to explore, separate from this news story.

A disgraced billionaire's name is on the beloved campus library. Does it come down?

A major donor funded a beloved public building decades ago. New evidence shows they also caused serious harm that was legal and accepted by many peers at the time. Removing the name may jeopardize future donations.

What does an institution owe the truth when its history funded the present?

Explore this quandary