Arrests Made in Homecoming Gang Rape

[madmom]

Source: TERRY COLLINS , AP

RICHMOND, Calif. (Oct. 28) -- Three more people have been arrested in connection with the gang rape and beating of a 15-year-old girl outside her high school homecoming dance in an attack that has generated widespread outrage.
A man and two boys were arrested late Tuesday, including 21-year-old Salvador Rodriguez of Richmond, Calif., and two teens, 16 and 17. They were each booked on one count of gang rape and likely face other charges including robbery and kidnapping....
.....Police said as many as seven ranging in age from 15 to mid-20s attacked the girl for more than two hours at a dimly lit area near benches Saturday night. As many as two dozen people saw the rape without notifying police....
.....Late Tuesday, SWAT teams were preparing to make more arrests as police are also offering a $20,000 reward they hope will bring more people forward with any information.

Read more: http://news.aol.com/main/nc/article/more-arrests-in-homecoming-gang-rape-in/737532

---

SWAT teams????

[derby378]

1. Finally...!

And I hope the rest of them get scared shitless when the tactical officers take 'em down.

[Liberal_in_LA]

18. +100

[rubberducky]

2. "swat teams?" The boys must play with thier toys. Who better to go after the juveniles involved?

[Codeine]

6. Not everyone involved with the rape was a juvenile

and it's possible that the suspects may be in gun-heavy, gang-related environments.

[emilyg]

47. A 20 yr. old is not a juvenile.

[Flaneur]

52. You're right. The SWAT team is a publicity stunt.

SWAT is supposed to be used for rare, high-danger situations like hostage-taking. But give the boys toys and they will play with them. Looks good on TV, too.

This is an example of SWAT mission creep. They use SWAT in penny ante drug busts, too.

[WriteDown]

3. If one or few of these guys gets injured while resisting...

I'll get my tears ready. :eyes:

[JonQ]

5. They had better hope none of the cops

have a teenage daughter.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

15. I usually detest excess force by the Police.

In this case however, oh well!
Judging by the number of murders in the area, I'd say that the SWAT team just might be appropriate.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/06/10/state/n103604D95.DTL

A new FBI report shows that violent crime in the San Francisco Bay area's biggest cities fell slightly last year after two years of increases.

Violent crime was only down 0.3 percent in 2007, lower than the statewide decrease of 3.2 percent. Property crimes such as burglaries and thefts were down more than 4 percent in the Bay Area.

The report shows that Richmond topped the state with the highest per-capita homicide rate of cities with at least 100,000 people. Richmond had 47 homicides in 2007 — the most in this decade.

[JonQ]

4. Oh please, please try them all as adults

At 16 you are old enough to know better.

These people will do this again and again if given the opportunity. Some people are beyond rehabilitation and need to simply be removed from society so they can do no further harm.

Quite possibly they will learn what it's like to be on the receiving end of a gang rape. And while I don't condone such behavior I certainly won't lose any sleep over the matter.

[ashling]

7. I believe you mean "beyond" rehabilitation

[JonQ]

8. Yep, edited, thanks

[Xicano]

10. They will under California Proposition 21

California Proposition 21, known also as Prop 21, was a proposition proposed and passed in 2000 that increased a variety of criminal penalties for crimes committed by youth and incorporated many youth offenders into the adult criminal justice system. Major provisions of the proposition, as summarized by Attorney General of California are:

• Increased punishment for gang-related felonies; death penalty for gang-related murder; indeterminate life sentences for home-invasion robbery, carjacking, witness intimidation and drive-by shootings; and a new crime of recruiting for gang activities; and authorizes wiretapping for gang activities.
  
  
• Requires adult trial for juveniles 14 or older charged with murder or specified sex offenses.
  
  
• Elimination of informal probation for juveniles committing felonies.
  
  
• Requires registration for gang related offenses.
  
  
• Designation of additional crimes as violent and serious felonies, thereby making offenders subject to longer sentences.
  
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_21_(2000)
  

[musicblind]

13. oh good!

[Xicano]

16. As I recall, some provisions of prop 21 have had some legal issues, but....

....in cases such as this I don't think there's any problem. After doing a quick google, I did come up with this San Diego defense attorney site that comments/corroborates that the law to try as adults minors who commit these types of crimes. Here's an excerpt from his page:

"Under a new California law, minors who are charged with certain violent crimes can be tried as adults without a hearing before a juvenile judge."

http://www.criminalattorneysandiego.com/lawyer-attorney-1076598.html

[madmusic]

45. CALIFORNIA’S PROPOSITION 21: A CASE OF JUVENILE INJUSTICE

This Note argues that Proposition 21 fails from both social policy and constitutional standpoints. Part II of the Note will discuss how juvenile were historically transferred to criminal courts and how Proposition 21 changed the transfer process. Part III discusses the social policy issues impacted by Proposition 21, arguing that it shifts the long-time focus of the juvenile justice system from prevention and rehabilitation to incarceration and punishment. Part IV discusses the constitutional concerns about the amendment, including arguments that the law violates the due process and equal protection rights of juvenile offenders. The statute also violates the separation of powers doctrine by giving prosecutors, rather than judges, authority to decide whether to try juveniles as adults. This Note concludes that Proposition 21 fails California’s juveniles because it is completely lacking in crime prevention efforts, focuses on the incarceration and punishment of youth offenders instead of the rehabilitation, and raises serious constitutional concerns in its implementation.

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~usclrev/pdf/075405.pdf

On the other hand, we could behead everyone based on the guilt found in a newspaper article. That would be cheaper and more fun.

[musicblind]

12. I agree with you but they won't, sadly

At least not the ones underage. They refused to try the people who premeditated an attempted murder on 15 year old Michael Brewer (who will be in intensive care for at least 5 more months with 80% of his body severely burned) as adults. They aren't even trying the one who planned it and ordered it carried out with 2nd Degree Murder. Just 'assault' ... because, you know, kids are all innocent and need to be super duper protected and stuff. A 15 or 16 year old could NEVER be deviant. :eyes:

[caseymoz]

30. It's not a matter of whether they could be deviant.

It's first a matter of whether you must give up on a child, or somebody who has just exited childhood. Many people loathe doing this.

The other fact that is just becoming a major consideration now: How long can we afford to hold them?

[harmonicon]

14. why do you think that?

The fact is that while a 16 year old may "know better", they don't have a fully developed adult brain. Even young children know the difference between right and wrong, but we don't treat them as adults. Should they be allowed to vote? I do think that teenagers who are involved in such serious crimes should be kept from regular society for as long as necessary to ensure that they can function as more-or-less normal human beings. However, I don't think there is any hope of that happening if they are placed in adult prisons. Sure, in the first instance they would likely be out of custody sooner than later (which I guess is bad if you think the point of prison is to punish, which I don't think it should be), but in the latter scenario, they would be more likely to commit further crimes when eventually let out as adults, having their entire lives destroyed by prison and a felony record.

[superconnected]

24. I believe culpability is usually determined on an individual basis.

[katkat]

26. as long as necessary = forever

That girl will be emotionally damaged and maybe physically damaged for the rest of her life. That's how long the attackers should be in jail.

There is zero excuse for a 16 year old to be involved in this.

Personally, I think that rapists should get life sentences. The damage they do to the victim's life, and the recidivism rate says to me they should be removed from society forever.

[harmonicon]

27. This is a child.

While I disagree with you on principle about sentencing, this is A CHILD, so different rules apply. Should children be allowed to join the military too?

[TorchTheWitch]

28. minors are never put into adult prisons

Where in the world did you get that idea? Being tried as an adult means just that... adult trial with adult sentencing. They go to juvenile prison until they reach 18 when they're transferred to adult prison if there is still time left on their sentence. After spending time in juvenile prison they'd be a lot more able to adapt to adult prison than a young adult who goes directly to adult prison.

And this "fully adult brain" excuse is nonsense. Any 15 year old who isn't mentally disturbed knows damn well that murder, rape and other violent crimes are wrong and they'll go to jail if caught.

Committing violent crimes as a teenager DESERVE having a felony record and their lives "destroyed" by prison time the rest of their lives.

[harmonicon]

35. You live in a dream world?

I would think that would be nice, but your dream world is frightening to me. Minors often serve in otherwise "adult" prisons. Just google "minors in adult prisons" and see for yourself. That's how I found this: www.wiretapmag.org/race/43395/ and this www.commondreams.org/views/073000-103.htm - there are numerous other examples.

The fact that teenagers do not have a fully developed adult brain is not "nonsense". It is scientific fact. Acknowledging that involves using the same kind of sense that keeps us from burning witches at the stake. You may repeat things like "Any 15 year old who isn't mentally disturbed knows damn well that murder, rape and other violent crimes are wrong and they'll go to jail if caught." all you like, but it doesn't make it so. Children simply do not have the same capacities for reason that adults have.

Where would you like to draw the line? An 8 year old knows the difference from right or wrong. Should a 6 year old ever be put in prison for life? Would that be ok? In all other cases - voting, military service, etc. - we have as a society decided that adulthood starts at age 18. In the case of criminal prosecution and sentencing, an exception is made. An exception is made by bodies which are disproportionally made up of white men to influence a system which disproportionately involves racial minorities and the poverty-stricken.

[JonQ]

38. Certain crimes I see as behind rehabilitiation

taking part in the repeated gang rape of another human being is one of them.

Their lives are already destroyed, now we need to focus on preventing them from destroying any more lives.

The rights of innocent people to not be violently gang-raped I would say take precedence over the rights of the gang-raper to have a 2nd chance.

[harmonicon]

42. where would you draw the line then?

12 and 13 year olds have been locked away in prisons. Do you honestly think that is ok? What is the purpose of making distinctions between adults and children if we can then ignore them on a whim? Would it be ok for an adult to have a sexual relationship with a 10 year old? A 6 year old? Should a child of 7 years be able to fight in a war? Once someone is old enough to read should they be able to vote? Would they have to know how to read, or just how to press a button?

[JonQ]

48. That's why we have courts

and judges, and juries to make such distinctions. And a pretty good line to draw is oh, 16, and gangraping a classmate.

But we need some flexibility in sentencing.
Consider the case of a 19 year old having consensual sex with this 17 year girlfriend.

Technically he's an adult and she's a child. According to the law he go to jail for the rest of his life and have to notify his neighbors that he is a dangerous sexual deviant.

Is this justice? I would argue no.

[harmonicon]

49. but courts don't decide who is an adult in any other instance

Should the age of consent be based on whether or not a court thinks a child is capable of behaving like an adult? I mean, would the fact that a 12 year old is "very adult" ever be an acceptable defense for a 60 year old on trial for having sex with a 12 year old? If not, why in another case could that same faulty reasoning be used by a prosecutor?

The scenario you present is a canard, since most states (or all?) have 2 year windows governing what is statutory rape.

As for a 16 year old raping someone, it's not as if I'm arguing that the person not be tried, but be tried in a juvenile court. A child who has no control over the society in which they live, who is exempt from taking part in that adult society, should not be punished as an adult in that society.

This is ignoring the fact that a child is not the same as an adult in terms of ability to reason and ability to take responsibility for their actions, for lack of both cognitive ability and experience. While an argument may be made that this is not the case with every 16 year old, that moves toward setting a vicious double-standard where some people who are legally children may be punished in adult courts based on a whim (a "whim" often bourn from racism), but a legal adult cannot be tried by a juvenile court, even if their mental development is not past that of a 16 year old.

[JonQ]

50. Sure they do

murder for instance. And there is a big difference between 19/17 and 60/12. And if you want to include a 2 year gap (which would be making an exception for age wouldn't it?) lets say a 20 year old and a 17 year old. Dangerous sex offender there.

And they do judge consent on an individual basis in some cases.

A 20 year old with severe mental retardation would not be deemed an adult by the courts.

"a "whim" often bourn from racism), "

Oh you just had to do it didn't you? Yeah, the only reason anyone is upset about this case is that the defendants are minorities. Yep, that is literally the only thing to be concerned about here. :eyes:

[harmonicon]

51. look at the percentage of white child offenders charged as adults compared to minorities.

I didn't do anything - a corrupt, ethically unjust society run by racists afraid of their own shadows did it. Punishment should not ever be the purpose of prison. I think it's probably that initial fault in reasoning that leads to the rest of the ignorant hate-fueled rhetoric I've seen in this thread.

[harvey007]

9. Rape is a Hate Crime

http://www.amnestyusa.org/women/sexualviolence.html

[LibDemAlways]

11. Seems to me security must have been pretty lax if a

21-year-old was hanging around and the victim had left the dance and was drinking in a school courtyard. That was a school-sponsored event in a "crime-ridden" neighborhood. Appalling that there wasn't more security presence. At my daughter's suburban school, an outside agency sends big burly guys over to police such events. They walk the campus to guard against just such incidents.

[intheflow]

17. You can thank budget cuts

in both education and police services for that. It was in a poor, minority neighborhood, never a high priority with any police force in the best of times. And what inner-city school can afford to hire private security or pay for police OT?

[WriteDown]

23. How about some concerned parents of teachers that act as

chapperones like it has been since prom's inception?

[intheflow]

32. They are usually in the inside of those events.

I know I did plenty of drinking and pot-smoking at school dances, knowing where I could go around the grounds to avoid detection. Once an hour someone might stroll by, say, the football field, but mostly the chaperones stayed in doors to break up fights and make-out sessions.

Additionally, lack of parent participation can be attributed to a number of causes in poor neighborhoods, including single parent households where the single parent has to work nights or stay in a shelter building to assure a bed for the child for the night, or parents being absent due to incarceration, or deportation.

[WriteDown]

33. Sounds like the only solution is to cancel proms in those areas

then. As well as all afterschool events. No way to guarantee safety. You'd think that someone would notice a group of 15 kids though.

[intheflow]

40. AFAICT, the rapists were not all kids and there's nothing

I've read that even links the teens to that school. This was a gang activity, just as likely to happen during prom as on any other given night. The suggestion that proms should be cancelled because of one gang rape is ridiculous. I'm sure there are lots of rapes going on during proms and football games and during house parties all over the country, you just don't hear about them because it's usually one-on-one and the girl is often too embarrassed or scared to come forward about it. If you think it wasn't going on in your school when you were growing up, no matter where you grew up, you're either male, naive, or both.

[wordpix]

61. school officials who apparently did not direct security officers to patrol outside

are the liable parties. If you're in charge of a school, you're in charge of personnel. You give your security people a schedule of who's inside and who's outside for the event. Simple--- but you need to organize security ahead of time.

[LibDemAlways]

34. Agreed. If the school can't afford outside security, then they have to

provide internal security. If they can't take measures to assure a safe event, why take the risk of having the event at all? Somebody should have been patrolling those grounds to make sure kids were not outside getting into or causing trouble. Imagine what the district will have to pay out when the victim's parents sue? Penny wise, pound foolish.

[wordpix]

57. +1 and when I taught at private schools, all teachers did rotating duty for events like dances

At one school it was a set rotation by teacher team, and at another it was mandatory sign-up for dances and other evening events===pick three events throughout the year.

If you didn't want to do it, you didn't have to work there. It was part of the job. Period.

[KamaAina]

39. Richmond is pretty much a poor, minority city

its police force must have been hammered by budget cuts, on top of being stressed by high crime.

[wordpix]

58. that is no excuse for not having adults present outside the bldgs as well as in

You just tell the teachers there is a requirement of supervision for so many dances/year, and some teachers will be supervising outside so bring your galoshes and jackets. You could also have parent volunteers. There is no excuse to have NO ONE supervising outdoors.

[wordpix]

59. no, you can thank school officials not doing their job of ensuring security for an event

[ronnie624]

55. Gang Rape Victim's Friend Blasts Officials

Baker blamed school district officials for not doing enough to protect her school and her friend. She said none of the four officers who were at the homecoming dance was patrolling the school premises even though a dozen young men were hanging out just a few feet from the gym entrance. She says school officials chose not to take any action.

"I looked outside of the gym and I saw 12 to 15 guys, sitting there, with no IDs," Baker said at the hearing. "The officers -- not only did they not check the IDs of those students or men sitting outside of of our campus, but the security officers who are employed here did no ... checking either. The assistant principal looked outside and actually saw those men, and did nothing about it."

<http://news.aol.com/article/gang-rape-victims-friend-blasts/742859?icid=sphere_newsaol_inpage>

[Cass]

60. This is bad. They have a duty to provide adequate security and supervision and they

failed to do so.

[barbtries]

19. all i can think is

that poor girl. that poor girl...

[Divine Discontent]

20. yes. and all those dozens of young adults who watched and did nothing, they need charged with not

reporting a crime they were witnessing in progress. Everyone of them! There hopefully will be one of them that will turn all the others in by name for a slightly lesser charge. I want all of them to be held responsible for being nasty. They were 'curious', I'm sure they'll say. Not gonna work! It's sick to know someone is getting raped and do nothing about it other than watch.

[barbtries]

21. sick

almost beyond belief. i know it has happened before but ... that poor girl.

[barb162]

22. I read elsewhere ALL were males.

I think this goes to a lot of sickass voyeurism by young male men who maybe have some booze in them. Plus group social behavior. I bet if it were one of them getting raped, they wouldn't have been so damned blase about not reporting this to the police.

[katkat]

25. is that a crime

I hope so. I would like to see the do nothings all get jail time themselves.

[Xicano]

29. First off, I agree its sick that witnesses didn't try to stop it.

However, allow me to play the unpopular role of devil's advocate here on why someone not intervening shouldn't be charged with a crime. Basically making not intervening to stop a crime boils down to requiring someone under penalty of law to place themselves in harms way. That would be a law despite being unconstitutional would probably cause a lot more problems than it would solve. I can foresee people 'getting away' with assault and murder by claiming they were duty bound by law to assault or kill a person because they at the time believed they were intervening against them committing a crime against another person. I can foresee numerous law suits filed against the state on cases where the person who intervened was harmed in some way as a result of the law, etc.

Again, I agree its sickening to see that there were several witnesses who did nothing. But I think its a bad idea to prosecute someone unless they can be tied to a crime as a participant, before, during or after the fact.

[ManiacJoe]

31. No such crime as "not reporting a crime".

[Pavulon]

36. Your problem is with swat? swat may deal with gang scum, or people

with extensive records of violence or two strikes. Either way it would be a shame it little ronnie the rapist got lit up going for a piece during an arrest. A true crying shame.

[madmom]

37. I really didn't say I had a "problem" with the SWAT teams, I was just surprised by it.

[Pavulon]

43. Swat serves high risk warrants.

so if these gentlemen had a criminal past, swat could be needed.

[Flaneur]

54. SWAT suffers from severe mission creep.

It was supposed to be for high risk situations like hostage-taking. Now it's used routinely for things like penny ante drug busts. SWAT is creepy paramilitarization of our police forces.

I don't know if Richmond police had any particularized information about how dangerous these guys were. I suspect they used SWAT because it looks good on TV.

[miyazaki]

41. KGO's Ray Taliafero really went off on Richmond last night

-you can listen to it in the archives.
(Reverend Ray, the best liberal on air personality there is, imho).

[Odin2005]

44. Throw the rapists in jail for life. Throw the people watching it away for a long time.

[Kievan Rus]

46. The rapists should be sent to the electric chair...and given a "Green Mile" dry-sponge electrocution

[noiretextatique]

53. catch every last one of these bastards and prosecute them

to full extent of the law. this is the second gang rape in richmond...the first happened about a year ago. karma will take care of the people who watched and did nothing.

[AlphaCentauri]

56. "bystander indifference"

Thats the same thing that is happening with health care and other social issues.

[Blue_Tires]

62. i'm glad the alleged perps got caught...

i was worried the 'no snitch' codes of the neighborhood would create a lot of blank memories...

[Liberal_in_LA]

63. Even the local ex-cons are enraged, looking for the perps: excerpt from today's article:

Rough justice

Even the neighborhood ex-cons who lounge against their cars all afternoon at the back end of campus are outraged. For all the sensitivity training going on, this is still a rough city - and there is rough justice.

"If we'd gone over there earlier, before it was over, those mother- would have been shot. For real," said 24-year-old Chuckie Pelayo, leader of a pack that hangs out at the corner of Hayes Street and Emeric Avenue, one block from the rape scene. "We've all been to prison, and we know the code of how you're supposed to behave. These younger guys, they don't know the code.

"Some of us know a few guys who were there, and we're out looking for them," Pelayo added, the others nodding. "They better hope the cops find them first, because when we find them the same thing that happened to that girl is gonna happen to them."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/11/01/MNR41ACRGU.DTL#ixzz0VcWqYFPs

[wordpix]

64. ""We know that courtyard, and we've been waiting for something to happen there"---security

So... the courtyard is where trouble happens and no one was checking it during the dance.

This hs security team gets an F- for not patrolling in an obvious hot spot.