Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | September 14, 2018

A 39-year-old transient who listed his occupation as “journeyman” was arrested for burglary.

Two individuals were charged with taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent: a 35-year-old unemployed San Fernando resident and a 36-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident.

A 58-year-old painter from Castaic and a 25-year-old caregiver from Lancaster were arrested for corporal injury on a former spouse/cohabitant/etc.

A 38-year-old custodian from Castaic was arrested for carrying a switchblade on his or her person, and an 18-year-old cook from Newhall was brought up on charges of vandalism.

A 24-year-old unemployed Cupertino resident was booked for annoying/molesting a child.

DUIs with prior arrests include:
32-year-old caretaker from Santa Clarita
28-year-old server from Pacoima
30-year-old marketer from West Covina
48-year-old claims examiner from North Hollywood
37-year-old operations manager form Canyon Country
29-year-old EMT from Valencia
50-year-old Metrolink technician from Lancaster
27-year-old landscaper from Canyon Country
35-year-old stocker from Canyon Country
42-year-old technician from Santa Clarita
25-year-old laborer from Lawndale
26-year-old associate from Saugus
22-year-old manager from Canyon Country
21-year-old unemployed Visalia resident

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
31-year-old plumber from Saugus
32-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident
31-year-old unemployed Saugus resident
46-year-old miner from Lake Elizabeth
31-year-old unemployed Saugus resident
40-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident
47-year-old unemployed Lebec resident
21-year-old self-employed Castaic resident
38-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident
47-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident
37-year-old unemployed Newhall resident
29-year-old general contractor from Newhall
42-year-old cook from Santa Clarita
50-year-old cleaner from Granada Hills

Penal Code 118 PC – Perjury

| Police Blotter | September 13, 2018

Perjury is a serious crime. It’s covered under California Penal Code 118 PC and is described as deliberately giving false information while under oath. Perjury usually comes up in the news when someone lies while giving testimony during court proceedings; however, there are several situations in which an individual is subject to California’s perjury law, including: when being deposed, in a signed affidavit, in a signed declaration or certificate, and on a DL 44 drivers license application at the DMV.

When a person is accused of committing perjury, there are four separate facts that a prosecutor must be able to prove.

The Statement was Willful or Deliberate

When a person makes a verbal or written statement that is then conveyed to another person that is intended to be taken as true, then the statement is considered to be willful and deliberate. Conveyance of the verbal or written statement from one person to another is required for this element of the crime to be true. It isn’t considered perjury if someone says or writes something to themselves that contains a false statement.

You Must Know that the Statement is False

Stating something that is false doesn’t necessarily constitute lying if the person making the statement believes it to be true. People mistake facts all the time, and making an honest mistake when you’re under oath isn’t a crime. For example, if a person gives testimony in court that they saw a defendant wearing all black clothing during the commission of a crime, when the defendant was actually wearing dark blue clothing, the person on the stand likely won’t be charged with perjury because they were unaware that the person’s clothing was different from what they thought.

You Must be Under Oath at the Time the Statement is Made

If you’re not under oath, or signing paperwork that falls under PC 118 (such as a DL 44 application at the DMV), then you can’t be charged with perjury. The law explicitly states that an individual must deliberately give false information while under oath. No oath, no perjury.
The Statement was Related to Material Fact

Not every false statement made under oath necessarily qualifies one to be charged with perjury. To be eligible for charges, one must make a false statement under oath pertaining to a “material fact.” A “material fact” is a fact that has great importance or consequence. For a statement of fact to be considered material, it must satisfy one of two criteria.
The statement must be used to affect the outcome of the proceeding or
The statement has the probability of affecting the outcome of the proceeding
It’s important to note that the statement doesn’t have to actually affect the proceeding, it just has to be made with the intention of affecting it or has to have the probably of affecting it.

Perjury is a felony in California, and carries the possible penalties of felony probation with up to one year in county jail or two, three, or four years in county jail. Judges have a great deal of leeway when it comes to sentencing someone for perjury, and will take into account the defendant’s prior criminal history as well as what effect, if any, the perjury had.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | September 7, 2018

A 49-year-old unemployed Newhall resident was arrested for residential burglary.

A 24-year-old receptionist from Northridge was arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant/etc. And a 32-year-old unemployed Newhall resident was brought up on charges of battery.

Two Lancaster residents – a 40-year-old warehouse hand and a 36-year-old property manager – were booked for reckless driving.

A 36-year-old self-employed Santa Paula resident was arrested for loitering with intent to prostitute.

A 40-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country was arrested for driving without a license.

Arrests for prostituting with prior knowledge of AIDS include:

31-year-old salesperson from Laurel
58-year-old logistical wizard from Van Nuys
27-year-old grip from Sylmar
52-year-old trucker from Castaic
63-year-old self-employed Santa Paula resident
20-year-old ramp agent from Palmdale
26-year-old mechanic from Newhall
51-year-old carpenter from Bakersfield
36-year-old self-employed Santa Paula resident
46-year-old construction manager from Lake Hughes

DUIs with prior arrests include:

29-year-old server from Valencia
24-year-old Valencia resident
41-year-old self-employed Santa Clarita resident
25-year-old welder from Palmdale
38-year-old traveling RN from Richmond
55-year-old police officer from Santa Clarita

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

32-year-old construction worker from Lancaster
27-year-old construction worker from Sylmar
38-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident
58-year-old unemployed Sun Valley resident
36-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident
41-year-old cook from Newhall
26-year-old gardener from Newhall
38-year-old AC technician from Canyon Country

Alcohol a Factor in July 4 Collision

| Police Blotter | September 6, 2018

On July 4 of this year, a young Santa Clarita man who served in the Marines was killed when he lost control of his vehicle, flipped it, and slid into a utility pole. It’s recently been released that he had a BAC of .22 when the accident took place, and that alcohol very likely played a factor in the collision.

According to reports, the man was driving down the street at a high rate of speed near the intersection of Bouquet Cyn. Rd. and Wellston Dr. when he attempted to make a lane change. He ended up hitting a vehicle traveling in front of him, causing him to lose control as the vehicle flipped onto its side and slide into a SoCal Edison pole. The vehicle he collided with was an SUV carrying three people, two of which were transported to the hospital after the collision. Investigators took blood samples to test for the presence of alcohol or drugs, the results of which were made public this week.

A blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08 or greater is the legal limit used by law enforcement to determine whether or not a person is intoxicated. At or around this level, a definite muscle coordination impairment is experienced, as well as impaired driving skills. With a BAC of .18 to .25, people generally experience disorientation, confusion, dizziness, and exhibit exaggerated emotional states. Their vision is effected by way of color perception, form, motion and dimensions. They also suffer a significant lack of muscle coordination, can begin slurring their speech and even feel apathetic and lethargic.

This tragic incident, and others like it that occur every day, prove positive the need to take care of ourselves, our friends, and our loved ones when it comes to drinking and driving. If you’re hosting a party where people will be consuming alcohol, take special care to watch out for them and make sure nobody gets behind the wheel drunk. Make sure those who drink give you their keys, or at least have someone with them who can drive sober. Call them a taxi or insist that they get an Uber or Lyft to get them where they’re going. If all else fails, and you can’t get them to call an alternative ride or stay at your place, call the cops. It may sound like a rotten thing to do to a friend or a family member, but it may just save their lives.

It’s also important to take the speed at which you or others drink into account. It’s entirely possible to get behind the wheel feeling in control, only to have the alcohol one consumes get absorbed into their bloodstream during the drive home, resulting in an unexpected impairment.

The three people in the SUV are lucky that the collision didn’t cost them more than a trip to the hospital, as alcohol-related collisions often take the lives of others on the roads as well as the impaired driver.

Historically, holidays that are closely associated with drinking have been extremely dangerous times to be on the roads. Just this past Labor Day Weekend, between Friday August 31st and Sunday September 2nd, ten motorists and two pedestrians were killed on California roads and the CHP had arrested over 700 people for DUI.

Labor Day 2018 Celebration Safety Tips

| Police Blotter | August 31, 2018

Labor Day is synonymous with the consumption of alcohol, making Labor Day weekend one of the most dangerous times of the year to be on the road. National statistics show that an alcohol-related fatal traffic collision occurs once every 51 minutes. Over the course of the three-day Labor Day weekend, that number nearly doubles, increases to one every 34 minutes. Whatever you choose to do, whether it be hosting a party yourself, staying home, or heading out of town, there are steps you can take to help keep your friends and family safe this holiday weekend.

Travelers and Party-Goers
Ideally, staying off the roads is the most effective (and obvious) way of avoiding dangerous traffic conditions. However, staying home isn’t always an option. If you plan to head out this weekend, here are a few safety tips to consider:
Recognize the signs of impaired driving on the roadways, stay away from these drivers, and don’t hesitate to report them. If you see someone swerving, drifting to one side or another, tailgating, unsafe lane changes and turns, etc. can all be signs of an impaired driver at the wheel. These people are extremely dangerous and need to be taken off the road as soon as possible. Calling the police is the right thing to do.
Don’t be one of them. If you’re going to consume alcohol, either make plans to stay where you’re going, set a designated driver, or use a ride sharing app like Uber or Lyft. Also, never, ever get into the car with a driver who has been drinking.
Don’t drive too closely to other cars. If you’re on the road during peak travel times, this may be unavoidable. Still, try to practice defensive driving and leave yourself some room to react.

Hosting your own gathering is a great way to stay off the roads yourself, but it’s important to be protective of the people you invite. Here are a few things to consider if you plan to have people over:

Have everyone who plans to consume alcohol give their keys to you and keep them in a large bowl or jar. This way, they have to go through you before they get behind the wheel.

Provide non-alcoholic drinks for designated drivers and others who may choose to remain sober.

If someone tries to leave who has been drinking, help them get a taxi or acquire another form of transportation. If all else fails, insist they stay over.

Prepare space ahead of time for family or friends to stay. A lot of people may refuse simply because they don’t want to impose. Knowing you planned having people stay from the get-go may help alleviate their apprehension.

Getting a DUI won’t just ruin your holiday weekend, it will affect your life for months to come. A first-time DUI can result in jail time, several thousand dollars in fees and the loss/suspension of driving privileges – at best. At worst, it can cost you your life, or cost the lives of others on the roadway and result in manslaughter or even murder charges. Using common sense and looking out for others can help ensure all of you enjoy a safe and happy Labor Day Weekend.

‘A House Divided’

| Police Blotter | August 31, 2018

By Stephen Smith

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” Abraham Lincoln

I am not concerned with the vagaries of presidents. I am concerned with how their words, actions and political dynamics have changed our country. I fear we are moving towards disaster.

Beginning with President Clinton’s contempt of court conviction and subsequent impeachment actions, the relationship between Republicans and Democrats has been extremely contentious. Besides the Democrats complaining that the impeachment was only about sex and not important, they could no longer compromise on the important issues of the day. The tactics of disparaging the character and good intentions with those they disagreed have left no room for civility, or as they often say in Congress, comity.

Enter Barack Hussein Obama on the national stage. We certainly had change. Anarchy became accepted by the Progressive Left as an expression of our First Amendment rights. (Remember Occupy Wall Street and the praise heaped on them by such icons as Nancy Pelosi.) With President Obama’s mantra of calling for “redistributive change” and “You didn’t build that,” the Communists and Socialists of this country knew it was their time to come out of the closet and make their rage and voices heard. Willful ignorance left them unaware of the human and economic tragedies that always occur in Communist/Socialist countries. Remember that the intolerant left of Communists and Socialists are simply opposite sides of a double-tailed coin. President Obama’s rush to judgment in blaming law enforcement first when injuries or death occurred in confrontations with black law breakers came without apology, even after the facts exonerated the police. This coincided with the unleashing of rage in the black communities, often sponsored by professional agitators funded by the far left. Anarchy became an accepted tool. Protesters became the new black and brown shirts. Leftist intolerance has even led to suppressing the freedom of speech for conservatives, driven by social media and violent organized protesters. Unfortunately, that practice has continued. The progressive left began looking much more like the Nazis and Fascists than any conservative.

In January 2017, the Trump era began. While being the constant center of attacks and staged protests by the left, President Trump (the tweeter-in-chief) has managed to put through policies that most believe are the source of the great economic explosion that we are currently experiencing. Despite the demonstrated collapse of socialist Venezuela and the success that President Trump has stimulated, the Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s of the world continue to praise Socialism and attack the American idea of a limited government and a free market economy. A recent study by the University of Chicago has shown that 45 percent of millennials have a favorable view of socialism. Most millennials would argue that despite our tremendous success, capitalism has failed us and should be thrown out as our economic model. They believe that it is immoral, out of control, harmful to the people and is only about greed. If our country is to continue to prosper, we must find a way to educate our rising generation. The enlightened self-interest of ethical capitalism has allowed us to have the most prosperous and comfortable society in the history of the world.

I fear that the cycle of political hate and discord is about to explode with an attempt to impeach a duly elected president. Accusations of Trump/Russian collusion are now mostly silent. Forgotten are the arguments of exonerating President Clinton because it was only about sex with his intern while in office. Now, Trumps pre-election sexual exploits are ample reason for impeachment. Special Counsel Mueller has convinced Trump’s attorney, Michael Cohen to plead guilty to cutting a check to porn star Stormy Daniels. Cohen believed he had violated a Federal Election Code thinking it was an in-kind donation. I have been a candidate for federal office twice. Based on my experience in dealing with the FEC, I agree with renowned Constitutional Attorneys Democrat Alan Dershowitz and Conservative Mark Levin, who have stated that there is no there, there. No one can say what crime was committed. Non-disclosure agreements are legal. As a candidate, the amount of his own money Trump donates to his campaign has no restrictions. Even if it was a violation, his campaign treasurer and lawyer have the responsibility to inform the candidate of a possible violation and to refuse to cut the check. Therefore, the only person who broke the law, if a violation was committed, was Michael Cohen.

Unfortunately, it now looks like the leftist Democrats, who consistently have tried to make law in the courts when they can’t in the legislature, are now trying to overturn an election by resorting to a bogus impeachment. They cry out, “Let slip the dogs of war” against our Constitutional Republican form of limited government. Remember the words of Lincoln.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | August 24, 2018

A 34-year-old parts manager from Colorado Springs was arrested for unlawful mail theft. And a 53-year-old assistant manager from Castaic was arrested for terrorizing/causing fear.

A 55-year-old tow truck driver from Los Angeles was brought up on charges of battery.

Two caregivers were arrested this week: a 28-year-old from San Bernardino was arrested for residential burglary and a 39-year-old from Gardena was brought up on charges of conspiracy to commit any crime.

A 49-year-old self-employed Saugus resident was arrested for battery against a former spouse, and a 46-year-old self-employed Newhall resident was booked for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant.

A 67-year-old Canyon Country resident was arrested for battery on PO/emergency personnel without injury.

DUI’s with prior arrests include:
35-year-old travel advisor from Santa Clarita
30-year-old chef from Newhall
55-year-old unemployed Palmdale resident
20-year-old lot associate from Canyon Country
24-year-old salesman from Long Beach
24-year-old substitute teacher from Palmdale
27-year-old cashier from Newhall
37-year-old landscaper from California City
27-year-old salesman from Newhall
43-year-old electrician from Glendale

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

25-year-old car washer from Palmdale
26-year-old caregiver from Palmdale
34-year-old Palmdale resident
26-year-old caregiver from Palmdale
29-year-old unemployed Lancaster resident
23-year-old unemployed Saugus resident
24-year-old caregiver from Newhall

Did Your Constitutional Right to Bail Just Get Voted Away?

| Police Blotter | August 23, 2018

Just this week, SB10 – California’s Bail Reform Law, has passed the State Assembly and now goes back to the Senate to decide whether or not they want to send it to the Governor’s desk. The bill passed by the bare minimum that senate rules allow, and the very same day voting took place, several previous backers of the bill pulled their support. Among those is the American Civil Liberties Union, saying that recent changes to the bill gave too much power to judges to decide who does and does not deserve to be freed while they await their court date.

These decisions, the ACLU claims, open doors wide open for several forms of discrimination, including racial, sex, gender, etc. – all of which currently permeate our criminal justice system at every level. Judges already have the power to reduce or even eliminate bail requirements for defendants who can’t afford to pay bail for their release. Those who aren’t deemed a threat to the community are either released or given a smaller bail amount.

A number of additional groups opposed to the bill’s passage, including the California Public Defender’s Association, that foresee more people being detained post-arrest after bail is eliminated. The bill only allows for the release of non-violent misdemeanor offenders, while most felony defendants and violent misdemeanor defendants will remain in jail without the possibility of ever getting out before their trial. Also, by removing the bail system entirely, the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution is called into question. In the Amendment, it states that:

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

The wording of the 8th Amendment begs the questions: In mandating that excessive bail shall not be required, does it not also imply that bail is a right that citizens if the U.S. should have? Under current U.S. law, a person is “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law,” meaning that without the possibility of bail, innocent people will be held in jail until their case goes to trial (which can take several months, or even years) or until they’re forced to plead guilty to the crime (which they may not have committed) in an attempt to get out of jail. Wouldn’t jailing innocent people be considered “cruel and unusual punishment?”

If SB10 is signed into law, it’s going to change things significantly for our state, and it’s going to cost us a lot more. For example:

Will cost Calif. counties collectively $3.8 billion per year (Washington D.C. system costs $65 million with a population of only 670,000 people).
Counties will be forced to apply to the Commission on State Mandates for Cost Reimbursement. This process alone will take years to sort out and will put immense pressure on every county to first implement and outlay resources with a speculative chance at savings, only then to determine the net costs.
Will require every county to develop and staff a pretrial services department. The defendant cannot be charged any costs for services or ordered to reimburse the county, regardless of a defendant’s ability to pay.
Will crowd out funding for other county programs and agencies like the district attorney’s office, the public defender’s office, the sheriff’s office and mental health services.
More than triple the time that each person spends in jail pretrial because it completely eliminates a person’s right to post bail. Instead, every arrestee will languish in jail until that person’s case is reviewed by a judge.
Will significantly increase the number of fugitives within the state and warrants for their arrest. (Presently there are approx. 1.7 million warrants in the system, at a cost of $1775 per FTA (Research Report, Dallas County Texas 2014 Study calculates to over $3 billion.)
Persons accused of committing a violent crime, including some misdemeanors, will not be reviewed for release.
Will cause the incarceration of more pretrial defendants because it eliminates the bail schedule.
Cause the court to release high-risk defendants without bail – bail provides defendants a financial incentive to appear in court, along with friends and family that cosign on the bail bond.
Will take away the rights of the 300,000+ (Ca Bail Ins. Companies – PPIC May 2017 Pretrial Report) defendants who choose to bail out in CA each year (at no cost to the taxpayers)

Essentially, eliminating bail under SB10 will cause people to sit in jail even longer until a judge can personally review their case, take vital funds from an already budget-stretched police department, and it will put potentially violent offenders back on the street. Call your State Senator today to tell them you want them not to send SB10 to the governor. The police don’t like it, the ACLU doesn’t like it, the California Association of Judges doesn’t like it, and neither will you.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | August 17, 2018

A 34-year-old Newhall resident who refused to state his occupation was arrested for a bike headlight violation.

A 45-year-old construction worker from Santa Clarita was arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant/etc. And a 24-year-old registered nurse from Fresno was arrested for battery against a former spouse.

A 37-year-old construction worker from Saugus was charged with burglary. And a 32-year-old pizza delivery person was arrested for taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

A 20-year-old designer was arrested for possession of a firearm with narcotics.

Two individuals were arrested for entering/remaining on posted property: a 39-year-old caretaker from Santa Clarita and a 30-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident.

There were three arrests for assault with a deadly weapon (not a firearm) with great bodily injury: a 21-year-old mechanic from Sylmar, a 21-year-old security guard from San Fernando, and a 21-year-old roofer from Reseda.

DUIs with prior arrests include:
61-year-old disabled veteran from Los Angeles
28-year-old exterminator from Valencia
23-year-old unemployed Bakersfield resident
25-year-old La Mesa resident who works in shipping/receiving
27-year-old nurse from Duarte
25-year-old construction worker from Santa Clarita
35-year-old electrician from Los Angeles
30-year-old custodian from Palmdale
40-year-old banquet houseman from Castaic
23-year-old fast food worker from Lancaster

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

56-year-old construction worker from Castaic
24-year-old animal trainer from Castaic
24-year-old recycler from Los Angeles
29-year-old unemployed Saugus resident
25-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident
27-year-old marijuana dispensary receptionist from Canyon Country
37-year-old unemployed Newhall resident
66-year-old HVAC specialist from Riverside
24-year-old server from Canyon Country
31-year-old day worker from Santa Clarita

Health and Safety Code 11365 HS – Being Present for Illegal Drug Use

| Police Blotter | August 16, 2018

Under Health and Safety Code 11365 HS, it’s illegal to be present in a place where the use of controlled substances is occurring if you do something to aid or abet the people using those substances in some way. Simply being at a party where some people are using illegal drugs isn’t enough to be charged with a crime. A person has to also do something, however minute, that influences the use of the illegal drugs. Some examples could include helping someone tie-off before shooting up, encouraging someone to use their drugs, or acting as a look-out.

In order for someone to be charged with violating Health and Safety Code 11365 HS, a few things have to have occurred:

  • An individual must willfully and intentionally visit a location or be present at a place where people are using one or more substances on a list of controlled substances. Should the individual have been brought there against their will, or ended up there by mistake, they likely won’t face charges.
  • The individual must know that another person or people intended to use one or more controlled substances. If you don’t know illegal drug use is going on, you can hardly aid or abet it.
  • The individual must intend to aid or abet the use of those substances in some way.
  • The individual did do something that aided or abetted the use of controlled substances.
  • The individual knew that their words or actions aided or abetted others in the use of controlled substances.

Under 11365 HS, “aiding and abetting” is described as knowing that another person intends to use a controlled substance, specifically intending to aid, encourage or facilitate their use in some way, and actually aiding, encouraging, or facilitating the use in some way.

The list of controlled substances covered under Health and Safety Code 11365 HS includes: cocaine, cocaine base, heroine, methamphetamine, mescaline, GHB, and peyote. Notably, marijuana is not on the list.

Violation of 11365 HS are misdemeanors, and include the possible penalties of misdemeanor probation (with the possibility enrollment in a drug treatment program), up to six months in county jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000. If an individual has no prior narcotic-related offenses and their charges do not involve either violence or the threat of violence, it’s possible that they will be eligible for California’s deferred entry of judgment drug diversion program. As part of this program, a defendant’s charges are suspended while they enroll in and complete a drug rehabilitation program. Upon successful completion of the drug rehabilitation program, the charges are dismissed.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | August 9, 2018

A 52-year-old therapist from Valencia was arrested for shoplifting after a specified prior conviction.

Two individuals were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant: a 19-year-old unemployed Castaic resident and a 51-year-old construction worker from Los Angeles.

A 23-year-old security officer and an unemployed 24-year-old, both from Oakland, were arrested for evading parole and disregarding safety. And an unemployed 28-year-old Canyon Country resident was arrested for disobeying a domestic relations court order.

A 27-year-old North Hills resident was brought up on charges of rape by force or fear. And a 49-year-old carpenter from North Hills was arrested for petty theft.

A 49-year-old teacher from Valencia was arrested for falsely reporting an emergency. A 26-year-old cook from Castaic was arrested for robbery.

A 23-year-old unemployed Piru resident was arrested for violating probation.

DUIs with prior arrests included:
44-year-old construction worker from Saugus
22-year-old pool cleaner from Quartz Hill
28-year-old stocker from Castaic
65-year-old stone broker from Canyon Country
26-year-old mover from Los Angeles
68-year-old retiree from Santa Clarita
30-year-old restaurant manager from Canyon Country
32-year-old dishwasher from Newhall
37-year-old construction worker from Pacoima
25-year-old laborer from Oxnard
30-year-old cook from Newhall
31-year-old real estate agent from Castaic

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
35-year-old unemployed Newhall resident
60-year-old unemployed San Fernando resident
27-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident
26-year-old unemployed Pasadena resident
30-year-old driver from Saugus
21-year-old unemployed Newhall resident
41-year-old unemployed North Hollywood resident
39-year-old assembly worker from Newhall
42-year-old unemployed Lake Forest resident
23-year-old computer worker from Castaic
43-year-old recycler from Newhall
27-year-old unemployed Lancaster resident
26-year-old construction worker from Newhall

Selling Imitation Controlled Substances – California Health & Safety Code 109575 HS and 11355 HS

| Police Blotter | August 9, 2018

Not long ago, a man was driving near Gorman when he was stopped by law enforcement officers. During the stop, the officers performed a search of the vehicle and discovered 2,600 packets of a suspicious white powder – which they assumed was cocaine – and arrested the man on suspicion of transporting narcotics. Fortunately for the suspect, subsequent testing revealed that the substance in the packets was not cocaine, nor any other controlled substance. The suspect, who had been released on bond after his arrest, was not charged with any crime.

Whatever the white powder was, the fact that it wasn’t a controlled substance resulted in no charges being filed – but that doesn’t hold true in every case; much depends on what the person in the situation intends to do with the substance. For example, if a person is in possession of a substance that isn’t controlled, but they intend to pass it off as the real thing, they could be charged with a crime.

California Health and Safety Code 109575 HS makes it illegal to knowingly transport, manufacture, distribute or possess an imitation controlled substance. California Health and Safety Code 11355 makes it illegal to arrange to sell and/or transport a controlled substance and deliver a fake product instead. The laws are designed to punish an individual’s intent to traffic in illegal drugs as well as any possible harm that may come to a victim after ingesting them.

In order for something to qualify as an imitation controlled substance, it has to meet one of two possible sets of criteria. The first is that it must be a substance that was specifically manufactured or designed to resemble the physical appearance of a controlled substance which a reasonable person of ordinary knowledge would not be able to distinguish from a controlled substance by its outward appearance. For example, grinding up chalk and attempting to pass it off as cocaine would probably result in a violation of 109575 HS, whereas attempting to pass off a baggy of chopped broccoli as marijuana would probably not.

The second set of criteria stipulates that the substance is not controlled, but by its appearance and your representation it would lead a reasonable person to believe that it had stimulating or depressing effects and that they would get high by ingesting it just like they would by ingesting the controlled substance. Basically, this second definition covers substances that aren’t specifically manufactured or designed by the seller to resemble a controlled substance, but that they still try to pass off as the real thing, and look close enough to the actual product that a reasonable person would assume that taking it would lead to the same effects.

Violations of Health and Safety Code 109575 are misdemeanors with the possible penalties of up to six months in county jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000. Violations of Health and Safety Code 11355 HS are “wobblers” that can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances of the case and the defendant’s prior criminal history. Penalties for misdemeanor charges include up to one year in county jail, while felony penalties include 16 months to three years in county jail.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | August 3, 2018

An unemployed 36-year-old Pacoima resident was charged with murder. A 58-year-old Valencia resident was charged with willful cruelty to a child/child endangerment.

Two individuals were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant: a 28-year-old laborer from Canyon Country and an unemployed 32-year-old Canyon Country resident.

Two construction workers from Newhall, a 26-year-old and an 18-year-old, were arrested for residential burglary. And a 21-year-old Valencia resident was charged with defacing property.

A 28-year-old restaurant server from Santa Clarita and a 42-year-old plumber from Saugus were arrested for terrorizing/causing fear.

A 51-year-old electrician from Santa Clarita was charged with arson of property. And a 19-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident was arrested for taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

A 34-year-old pest control technician from Newhall was arrested for resisting an officer.

DUIs with prior arrests include:
43-year-old art director from Valencia
42-year-old engineer from Santa Clarita
52-year-old retired Palmdale resident
25-year-old store clerk from Valencia
51-year-old operations assistant from Saugus
27-year-old mechanical assembler from Palmdale
56-year-old tow truck driver from Agua Dulce
51-year-old construction worker from Pearblossom
58-year-old aviation mechanic from Stevenson Ranch
25-year-old warehouse worker from Lancaster
52-year-old construction worker
22-year-old plumber from Canyon Country
32-year-old cook from Inglewood

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
23-year-old unemployed Bakersfield resident
39-year-old assembly worker from Canyon Country
30-year-old land surveyor from Valencia
48-year-old unemployed Saugus resident
30-year-old server from Valencia
37-year-old plumber from Canyon Country

California Penal Code 529 PC – False Impersonation

| Police Blotter | August 2, 2018

In the State of California, pretending to be someone else in certain situations can get you into a lot of trouble. According to California Penal Code 529 PC, California’s “false impersonation” law, when you pretend to be someone else in their public or private capacity and do something that could cause that person to become liable to a lawsuit, prosecution, be obligated to pay money, or which might cause you to gain some sort of benefit from impersonating that individual, you’re breaking the law.

For example, suppose an individual is arrested for shoplifting and, upon their arrest, gives the police the name of their cousin instead of his or her own. After being taken to the station for booking and processing, the suspect is released on his or her own recognizance and signs the cousin’s name to the booking paperwork instead of their own. The suspect then blows off their court date and his or her cousin is subsequently arrested at a later date for the failure to appear instead of the actual suspect.

In the example above, the suspect would likely be charged with violating PC 529, because by giving police the name of their cousin instead of their own and signing the cousin’s name to the booking paperwork, the suspect placed the cousin in a situation in which they would be liable for prosecution; the simple act of impersonating someone else isn’t necessarily a crime in-and-of itself.

For another example, suppose a woman impersonates a famous contemporary singer and attends a karaoke night at a local bar. She sings the singer’s songs and “acts” as though she herself is the famous singer. The impersonator in this situation isn’t putting the singer in any legal danger, nor is the singer receiving any benefit from their impersonation and is therefore not breaking the law. However, if the were to perform her impersonation at a restaurant or a boutique in an attempt to use their target’s celebrity status to get free food or outfits, the impersonator would be committing a crime because she is benefiting from the impersonation.

“False impersonation” is a “wobbler” in California, meaning it can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances of the crime and the defendant’s prior criminal record. If charged as a misdemeanor, the possible penalties include misdemeanor probation, up to 1 year in county jail and/or a fine of up to $10,000. For felony charges, the possible penalties include felony probation, 16 months to three years in jail and/or a fine of up to $10,000. Also, if convicted on felony charges, the defendant will lose his or her eligibility to own firearms.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | July 26, 2018

A 35-year-old self-employed Newhall resident was brought up on charges of kidnapping, and a 33-year-old machinist from Agua Dulce was arrested for carrying a loaded firearm.

A 53-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country and a 30-year-old accountant from Castaic were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant/etc.

An unemployed 37-year-old Lancaster resident and a 28-year-old handyman from Hesperia were charged with terrorizing/causing fear.

A 30-year-old manufacturer from Santa Clarita was arrested for forgery/counterfeit public/corporate seal. And a 31-year-old server from Canyon Country was arrested for violating probation.

A 48-year-old referee was arrested for theft of personal property. Now that’s a penalty.

DUIs with prior arrests include:

39-year-old car detailer from Saugus
28-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country
42-year-old event planner from Van Nuys
56-year-old construction worker from Bishop
31-year-old construction worker from Santa Clarita
32-year-old construction laborer from Sun Valley
33-year-old electrician from Canyon Country
26-year-old office manager from Covina
33-year-old gardener from Sun Valley
55-year-old housewife from Hawthorne
40-year-old HVAC specialist from Canyon Country
30-year-old manager from Acton
34-year-old waitress from Canyon Country
39-year-old construction worker from Tracy
56-year-old construction worker from Bishop
28-year-old student from Santa Clarita
32-year-old construction laborer from Sun Valley

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

54-year-old maintenance worker from Canyon Country
26-year-old unemployed Reseda resident
26-year-old construction worker from San Rafael
28-year-old web cam model from Sylmar
38-year-old electrician from Saugus
35-year-old construction worker from Lancaster
37-year-old mechanic from Palmdale
36-year-old carpenter from Newhall
33-year-old handyman from Santa Clarita
35-year-old unemployed Newhall resident
33-year-old gardener from Newhall
44-year-old ranch hand from Garberville

What Happens When Someone is Arrested?

| Police Blotter | July 26, 2018

There are two different scenarios in which someone can be arrested: a police officer has probable cause to suspect a crime has been committed, or a judge has issued a warrant for someone’s arrest. Probable cause is a common situation under which someone can be arrested. If a police officer either witnesses a crime or is presented with enough evidence to suspect you committed a crime, he or she has the legal authority to arrest you. A good example of this type of arrest would be a DUI stop. The police officer sees someone driving erratically, they pull the person over and subject the driver to a breathalyzer. If that breathalyzer reads .08 or above (and sometimes even if it’s lower) the officer can legally arrest the driver.

Warrants are a bit more complicated in that they are required to be issued by a judge. There are two types of warrants a judge will issue that require someone’s arrest: arrest warrants and bench warrants. Before an arrest warrant can be issued an investigation will need to take place so that law enforcement officers can gather evidence. These investigations often include police, a victim or witnesses, and even the district attorney. The evidence is then brought before a judge or a grand jury, which must decide if the evidence suggests probable cause that a crime was committed. If so, the warrant is issued and signed by the judge. If not, then no warrant is issued.

Once an arrest warrant has been issued, police have the legal authority to locate the suspect at their home, office, or wherever the person may be and place them under arrest. The person will then be held until their court date, or until he or she is bailed out of jail (if bail is set).

Bench warrants are somewhat different than arrest warrants, but the end result is often the same: The suspect is arrested and taken into custody.

Bench warrants are usually issued by a judge when a defendant either fails to appear in court, fails to pay a fine, or fails to adhere to one or another court order. Bench warrants are the most common warrant issued in California. When someone is arrested under a bench warrant, there will usually be a bail amount set already. The amount will vary depending on the reason behind the warrant. Those who fail to appear in court while out on bail will often find themselves with much higher bail amounts this time around.

Regardless of which type of warrant is issued, the police are obligated to execute it. A warrant isn’t just a piece of paper that gives the police the power to arrest someone; it’s more like an order telling them they have to.

Leave Your Dog in the Car? Better Think Twice About the Legal Issues

| Police Blotter | July 19, 2018

The weather patterns being what they are, it looks like it’s going to be another long, hot, dry summer. That said, it’s important to remember that while you and I can get hot, animals can get even hotter. Even with the shedding of their “winter coats,” dogs can still easily overheat, because they can’t sweat – and panting can only go so far.

If you’re out and about this summer and you decide to take your furry friends with you, think twice before leaving them in the car. Even if you’re “just running inside for a second,” it doesn’t take long for the interior of cars to get very hot and uncomfortable. In conditions like that, animals can overheat very quickly.

You’ve probably seen news stories or read articles about animal lovers who bash out car windows when they discover animals inside. It’s happened several times in the past, and will likely continue to happen well into the future. The act of smashing a complete stranger’s windows may seem like overreacting; and to some it is. Some folks may or may not take a tire iron to the back window of your Benz when they see your pet panting in the back seat; but they will also quickly call in law enforcement to the rescue.

You see, leaving an animal in an unattended vehicle is illegal in the State of California, and is covered under 597.7 PC. To be clear, simply leaving an animal in an unattended vehicle is not in and of itself illegal, it depends on whether or not the animal’s welfare is in danger by being left in the car. If it’s cooler outside, with a light breeze, and the windows are open to provide ventilation, then they may be fine for just a few minutes. But when the temperature is higher, the windows are closed, or the animal appears to be uncomfortable or suffering, then there will be a problem, and it could mean a huge legal one for you
Convictions of violating 597.7 PC can carry an array of penalties and circumstances under which they can/will be applied. For a first conviction, an individual can be fined $100 per animal, as long as none of the animals left in an unattended vehicle suffered great bodily injury. If the animal does suffer great bodily injury (and it’s still the defendant’s first conviction), then the defendant may face a fine of $500 and a possible six-month stay in county jail. For second convictions, the $500 fine and six-month stay in jail is the penalty he or she will possibly face, regardless of whether or not there was any injury to the animal.

Lastly, leaving an animal unattended in a car can sometimes be seen as an act of neglect, which could bring charges of violating California Penal Code 597 PC, animal neglect. If convicted of this, the defendant can face up to three years in state prison. It’s just not worth the risk, to you or to them.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | July 19, 2018

A 49-year-old unemployed Newhall resident was arrested for terrorizing/causing fear.

A 35-year-old self-employed Canyon Country resident, a retired 64-year-old Valencia resident, and a 19-year-old paintball rep from Stevenson Ranch were arrested for battery against a former spouse.

A 21-year-old warehouse worker from Canyon Country was brought up on charges of carrying a loaded firearm. And a 43-year-old unemployed Valencia resident was arrested for grand theft auto/horse/etc.

A 52-year-old sound mixer from Castaic as arrested for sending harmful matter to seduce a minor.

A 19-year-old landscaper from Montana was arrested for possessing a controlled substance while armed with a loaded firearm.

DUI’s with prior arrests include:

24-year-old unemployed Stevenson Ranch resident
43-year-old vice president from Santa Clarita
23-year-old assembly worker from Santa Clarita
28-year-old student from Newhall
30-year-old homemaker from Paola, Kansas
23-year-old mechanical engineer from Canyon Country
45-year-old investor from Valencia
30-year-old Pacoima resident who works in human resources
25-year-old self-employed Trinity Circle resident
31-year-old ranch hand from Santa Clarita
24-year-old landscaper from Hollywood
30-year-old taco truck employee from Perris
22-year-old insurance collector from Goleta
27-year-old stunt man from Agua Dulce

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

27-year-old unemployed Castaic resident
25-year-old unemployed Palmdale resident
19-year-old unemployed Pomona resident
27-year-old clerk from Granada Hills
25-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident
54-year-old Santa Clarita resident who listed their occupation as “50”
30-year-old self-employed Valencia resident
27-year-old unemployed Burbank resident

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | July 13, 2018

There were two arrests for battery against a former spouse, including a self-employed 31-year-old Canyon Country resident and a 33-year-old supervisor from Santa Clarita.

A 49-year-old security officer from Van Nuys was arrested for embezzling a rented/leased vehicle. And a 21-year-old unemployed Valencia resident was arrested for taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

Two individuals were arrested for possession of marijuana for sale: a 29-year-old barber from Maplewood, Minnesota and a 29-year-old unemployed Valencia resident.

A 22-year-old Castaic resident was brought up on charges of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger on his or her person. And a 27-year-old Valencia resident was charged with robbery.

A 22-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident was arrested for damaging property. A 31-year-old program manager from Woodland Hills and a 58-year-old plumber from Canyon Country were both arrested for DUI of alcohol causing injury.

DUIs with prior arrests include:

52-year-old manager from Valencia
35-year-old cook from Santa Clarita
29-year-old unemployed Newhall resident
28-year-old vet tech from Canyon Country
28-year-old administrator from Lake View Terrace
24-year-old graphic designer from Lake Hughes
23-year-old unemployed Van Nuys resident
29-year-old construction worker from Newhall
39-year-old welder from Newhall

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

26-year-old self-employed Stevenson Ranch resident
24-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident
38-year-old stocker from Castaic
31-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita resident
34-year-old unemployed San Bernardino resident
36-year-old transient from Canyon Country
42-year-old truck driver from California City
40-year-old book keeper from Canyon Country
22-year-old construction worker from Sherman Oaks
59-year-old mechanic from Canyon Country
40-year-old unemployed Lancaster resident
35-year-old unemployed Saugus resident

Expungement of Criminal Charges in California

| Police Blotter | July 12, 2018

Spending time in jail is never easy; the difficulties one can encounter while being incarcerated vary pretty widely depending on the crime he or she was convicted of and the type of facility they were sent to. For example, a person who spends time in county jail for missed child support payments will likely have an easier time than someone who’s sent to Pelican Bay. The reasoning behind this is because the person in county jail will typically be surrounded by others who have been convicted of committing misdemeanors and relatively minor felonies. The individual in Pelican Bay, however, will share their surroundings with a variety of much more dangerous, and often violent criminals.

Unfortunately for many, the difficulties associated with having spent time in custody aren’t necessarily over once a person is released – particularly when searching for employment. When applying for a job, pretty much every employer is going to want to know if the applicant has a prior criminal record, and those who do report extreme difficulty in obtaining employment post-incarceration. Luckily, for those who were sent to county jail instead of state prison, there is hope in the form of California Penal Code 1203.4 PC: California’s Expungement Law.

Expungement is something that an individual can apply for that will have the court seal their criminal records, thereby making it impossible for employers to use that prior criminal conviction against the applicant, as well as making it illegal for them to even bring it up.

To be eligible for expungement, a person must meet three basic criteria:

  • The defendant must have completed their probation successfully (including the payment of any fines and/or court fees, restitution, counseling and/or community service)
  • They must not be currently charged with another criminal offense, on probation for another criminal offense, or currently serving time for another criminal offense, and
  • The defendant cannot have been sentenced to serve time in state prison for the offense or for a parole violation regarding their offense.

Certain offenses are ineligible for expungement. Those offenses are: 286 PC: sodomy with a child, PC 288: lewd acts with a child, PC 288a (c): oral copulation with a child and PC 264.5(d): statutory rape.

An attorney can assist with the expungement process. It includes filling out the necessary paper work, waiting for the court to process it, and then attending an expungement hearing. If an expungement is granted, it can benefit the defendant in a variety of ways, including in the search for employment, obtaining a state professional license, and even help avoid certain consequences involved with immigration. If you think that you or someone you know may be eligible for expungement, be sure to speak with an attorney first. As bail bondsman, we are happy to offer information about laws that exist, but only an attorney is qualified to provide you with advice and counsel.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | July 6, 2018

A 21-year-old dispatcher from North Hollywood was arrested for reckless driving. And a 31-year-old transient from El Monte was arrested for intentionally interfering with public transportation.

A 28-year-old security guard from Las Vegas was arrested for trafficking a victim under 18 years of age. A 37-year-old unemployed woman from Cerritos was brought up on charges of cruelty to a child likely to produce great bodily injury or death.

Two individuals from San Pedro were charged with robbery – a 35-year-old construction worker and a 22-year-old loader.

Three individuals were charged with the possession of burglary tools, including a 20-year-old laborer from Menifee, a 23-year-old Hawthorne resident, and a 34-year old Los Angeles resident.

Two 19-year-old Los Angeles residents, a general laborer and a mechanic, were arrested for participating in an illegal speed contest.

DUI’s with prior arrests include:

57-year-old maintenance worker from Palmdale
35-year-old tractor driver from Hanford
57-year-old nurse from Huntington Beach
57-year-old engineer from Saugus
37-year-old engineer from Azusa
29-year-old from Hawaiian Gardens
28-year-old sales associate from Littlerock
41-year-old cook from Los Angeles
23-year-old maintenance worker from Los Angeles
38-year-old cook from Inglewood
32-year-old San Bernardino resident
28-year-old cashier from Los Angeles

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

28-year-old cashier from Palmdale
35-year-old unemployed Maywood resident
29-year-old self-employed Anaheim resident
18-year-old Lancaster resident
24-year-old unemployed Covina resident
33-year-old self-employed Los Angeles resident
32-year-old laborer from Compton
22-year-old unemployed South Gate resident
51-year-old laborer from Whittier

California Stalking Law – PC 646.9

| Police Blotter | July 5, 2018

Police responded to popular YouTube star Logan Paul’s residence in Los Angeles recently after two alleged stalkers hopped a fence and vandalized one of his cars. One suspect, a male, was arrested while the other, an underage female, was released into her parents’ custody.

Stalking is covered under California Penal Code 646.9 and is described as (willfully and maliciously) repeatedly following, harassing, or threatening someone to the point that they fear for the safety of themselves and/or their family. Some examples include:
Frequently sending emails to an ex-lover that include threats (either specific or non-specific in nature)
Following someone home from school or work while occasionally making menacing statements to them at work or school
Making frequent unwanted advances toward someone and threatening them if they don’t respond favorably
California has some of the toughest stalking laws in the nation, and they are usually associated with the large number of celebrities who live out here. California’s stalking laws were passed in 1990 in response to the cases involving two actresses: Theresa Saldana and Rebecca Schaeffer, who were both stalked and attacked by deranged fans. Saldana was stalked and repeatedly stabbed, though she survived. Schaeffer, unfortunately, wasn’t as lucky and did not survive the attack.

Interestingly, celebrity stalking cases comprise a very small amount of California’s stalking cases. Most of the time, stalking cases come from someone who the victim already knows, and the stalking occurs via the internet (cyberstalking), through the workplace, or in connection to a domestic violence case. Additionally, 80 percent of stalking victims are female.

Stalking can occur in a variety of ways, including following someone or “accidentally” running into them repeatedly, sending emails, voice mails or text messages, calling them on the phone, driving by their home or office, sending unwanted gifts, and gathering an inordinate amount of information about someone. If the victim of a stalking is a current or ex-lover, a roommate, a parent of one of your children, or someone you were dating, the crime will be known as “intimate partner stalking” and be addressed under California’s domestic violence laws.

Stalking is a “wobbler” that can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the defendant’s prior criminal history and the circumstances surrounding the specific case. However, the crime will always be charged as a felony if the victim had a restraining order active against the defendant, and/or the defendant has a prior stalking conviction.

When charged as a misdemeanor, the possible penalties include the typical misdemeanor penalties of informal probation, up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000. It can also include a restraining order against the defendant and/or treatment in a mental facility. Felony penalties include formal probation, 16 months to five years in California state prison, a maximum $1,000 fine, a restraining order, possible treatment at a mental health facility, and possible registration as a sex offender.

Local Crime

| Police Blotter | June 29, 2018

This week, two individuals were picked up for robbery: a 41-year-old unemployed Saugus resident, and a 27-year-old transient from Santa Clarita. And a 24-year-old unemployed Canyon Country resident was charged with first degree robbery.

A 21-year-old Canyon Country resident was arrested for assault likely to produce great bodily injury. And a 22-year-old from Los Angeles was booked for falsely reporting a bomb to any person.

A 26-year-old woman from Valencia was arrested for battery against a former spouse. And a 35-year-old Oxnard resident was arrested for shoplifting after a specified prior conviction.

A 55-year-old man from Bakersfield was brought up on charges of carrying a loaded handgun, without being the owner.

Three individuals were arrested for acquiring access cards in four or more names in less than a 12 month period: a 39-year-old handyman from North Hollywood, a 28-year-old Arleta resident, and a 31-year-old transient from Santa Clarita.

DUIs with prior arrests include:

34-year-old construction worker from Newhall 
30-year-old assistant manager from Newhall
20-year-old valet from Winnetka
30-year-old regional supervisor from Bell
34-year-old salesman from Castaic
20-year-old fire direction control specialist from Pleasantville, NJ

19-year-old man from Mulvane, Kan.
25-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country
47-year-old electrician from Pacoima
38-year-old dock worker from Sylmar
37-year-old roofer from Newhall
32-year-old technician from Newhall
26-year-old security guard from Arleta
35-year-old custodian from Palmdale

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:

26-year-old Saugus resident
29-year-old Canyon Country resident
32-year-old Lake Elsinore resident
41-year-old Lancaster resident
35-year-old store clerk from Saugus
27-year-old Agua Dulce resident
34-year-old lineman from Valencia
24-year-old produce clerk from Canyon Country
32-year-old Los Angeles resident
23-year-old Hacienda Heights resident

Local Crime

| Police Blotter | June 22, 2018

Page 1 of 261 2 3 26

Doug’s Rant – Video Edition

  • WatchDoug’s Rant June 22
  • WatchDoug’s Rant June 15