Logo

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | May 19, 2018

There were several individuals arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant, etc.: an unemployed 61-year-old Stevenson Ranch man, a self-employed 35-year-old Stevenson Ranch man, a 27-year-old construction worker from Valencia, a 40-year-old self-employed Newhall man, a 45-year-old day laborer from Newhall, a 52-year-old unemployed Newhall woman, and a 24-year-old custodian from Newhall. And an unemployed 29-year-old Los Angeles man was arrested for battery against a former spouse. A retired 57-year-old Northridge woman was cited for willful cruelty to a child/child endangerment.

A 23-year-old warehouse worker from Newhall was arrested for manufacturing/giving/lending/possessing metal knuckles.

A 21-year-old construction worker from Newhall was arrested for receiving known stolen property.

An unemployed 44-year-old Castaic woman was arrested for forgery/counterfeiting a public/corporate seal.

A 32-year-old accountant from Saugus was arrested for grand theft of money/property greater than $400.

An unemployed 26-year-old Castaic man was charged with possession of a specific narcotic/controlled substance without a prescription.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
35-year-old pest control employee from Castaic
26-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita man
32-year-old security worker from Lancaster
28-year-old construction worker from Glendale
29-year-old unemployed Newhall man
38-year-old maintenance man from Saugus
31-year-old electrician from Valencia

DUIs with prior arrests included:
51-year-old waitress from Palmdale
49-year-old cook from Van Nuys
57-year-old mechanic from N. Hollywood
32-year-old electrician from Henderson, Nev.
26-year-old handyman from Lompoc
40-year-old laborer from Porterville
34-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita man
27-year-old Marina del Rey woman who works in marketing
41-year-old caterer from Canyon Country
32-year-old medical biller from Canyon Country
24-year-old crew member from Santa Clarita
35-year-old stock trader from Arcadia

Animal Cruelty 597 PC

| Police Blotter | May 19, 2018

Recently, an SCV deputy rescued a dog left in a hot vehicle in the parking lot of Walmart in Canyon Country. The temperature outside was 90 degrees, meaning that the temperature inside the car could get as high as 130 degrees. To get the dog out, the deputy had to break one of the windows – something both police and the public are legally allowed to do – because the owner couldn’t be located. Once the owner returned to the vehicle, she was arrested on animal cruelty charges.

Animal cruelty laws in California are covered under California Penal Code 597 PC and make it illegal to kill, physically harm, overwork or neglect an animal. The law’s definition covers a wide variety of behaviors, including things like leaving an animal unattended in a vehicle (597.7 PC), cockfighting, and dog fighting (597.5 PC). The crime can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances of the crime and the defendant’s prior criminal history.

It isn’t illegal in and of itself to leave an animal unattended in a vehicle. However, it becomes a crime if doing so endangers the animal’s health or well-being. Certain conditions, such as the weather, ventilation, whether the animal has food or water, or any other circumstances that could reasonably lead to the suffering or death of the animal, are taken into consideration when police are deciding whether or not to charge someone with violating 597.7 PC.

The law is relatively new, having been first enacted in 2006, and the state Legislature based the law on the fact that California weather can make leaving an animal in a vehicle extremely hazardous to the animal’s health. Previously, only the police had the right to break into someone’s vehicle to rescue a suffering animal. However, recently a law was passed allowing members of the public to do so, as well. A member of the public is allowed to break into a vehicle to rescue the animal if it’s clearly suffering, or if the owner of the vehicle is unable to be located for a period of time and authorities have been contacted. It should be noted that if the animal doesn’t appear to be in imminent danger, it’s best to let the police decide whether or not to break someone’s window.

Penalties for leaving an animal unattended in a vehicle vary significantly. If the animal suffered no bodily injury, the penalty is a $100 fine, per animal, for first-time offenders. If the animal does suffer harm, the charge is upgraded from an infraction to a misdemeanor, with the possible penalties of a $500 fine and up to six months in jail. Since leaving an animal unattended in a vehicle is also a sign of neglect, it’s very possible for someone to be charged with the more serious crime of animal abuse, with the potential penalty of up to three years in California state prison.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | May 11, 2018

A Stevenson Ranch couple – a 49-year-old caregiver and a 46-year-old man who refused to give his occupation – were arrested for battery against a former spouse.

A self-employed 30-year-old Castaic man was picked up for assault with a deadly weapon, not a firearm, with great bodily injury. A 34-year-old movie industry employee from Newhall was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon.

An unemployed 34-year-old Canyon Country man was arrested for terrorizing/causing fear. An 83-year-old retired Castaic man was picked up for cruelty/abuse to a work animal.

A 26-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita woman was arrested for conspiring to defraud/etc. a U.S. agency. A 45-year-old mechanic from Glendale was arrested for giving false evidence of registration.

Three Bakersfield residents were arrested for grand theft of money/property exceeding $400: a 26-year-old unemployed female, a 22-year-old panel installer, and a 20-year-old Arby’s employee.

A 36-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country was arrested for burglary. An unemployed 23-year-old Bakersfield man was cited for possession of burglary tools.

A 34-year-old unemployed Newhall man and an unemployed 30-year-old Newhall man were cited for shoplifting. A 32-year-old Newhall man was charged with petty theft with a specified prior conviction.

A 38-year-old mover from Arcadia was arrested for illegal possession of tear gas by a narcotic addict.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance included:
37-year-old house cleaner from Newhall
34-year-old self-employed Canyon Country man
41-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita woman
50-year-old caregiver from Castaic
42-year-old unemployed Newhall man

An unemployed Bakersfield man was charged with attempting grand theft auto. A 37-year-old North Hills man whose occupation is self-recycling was charged with taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

DUIs with prior arrests include:
27-year-old plumber from Canoga Park
54-year-old engineer from Saugus
24-year-old salesman from Castaic
40-year-old self-employed Saugus man
48-year-old locksmith from Van Nuys
45-year-old warehouse worker from Canoga Park

Pedestrians at Fault in Several Fatal San Fernando Collisions

| Police Blotter | May 10, 2018

The LAPD is urging pedestrians to take care and pay attention when crossing the street. According to data collected by the LAPD’s Valley Traffic Division, 7 of the 10 pedestrian fatalities that occurred between January 1 and April 21 in the San Fernando Valley were the fault of pedestrians – not motorists. When crossing the street, pedestrians are supposed to use crosswalks or cross corner-to-corner. None of those killed by motorists followed these rules; they were found to have been crossing the street illegally.

One of the reasons for the increase in at-fault pedestrian fatalities is believed to be, ironically, the same thing that’s been plaguing motorists: not paying attention. It happens all the time, someone walking along a sidewalk, head down and texting away, as other people are forced to step out of the way to avoid being bumped into. As idiotic as it may seem, people continue to exhibit this behavior when stepping into the street. Whether it’s because they’re oblivious to the world around them, or because they think that cars on the road will show them the same courtesy other pedestrians do is anyone’s guess.

Another factor believed to play in to the rise in pedestrians being at-fault in fatal collisions is the mistaken belief that pedestrians always have the right of way. According to California Vehicle Code 21950: “The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. The driver of a vehicle approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the vehicle or take any other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the safety of the pedestrian.”

Basically, pedestrians do have the right-of-way – in crosswalks (marked or not) at intersections. Taking it even further, California Vehicle Code 21950(b) states that “No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.”

This section of the law generally gives vehicles the right-of-way in areas where pedestrians don’t have it, or if the vehicle is close enough to the pedestrian that stepping off the curb would be dangerous.

Ultimately, knowledge of where and when a pedestrian has the right-of-way can be useful, and help you be a more conscientious citizen, but knowledge of California Vehicle Codes isn’t necessary; paying attention, crossing at a crosswalk and/or not stepping into traffic can significantly reduce the chances of being hit by a motorist.

The High Cost of Vandalism

| Police Blotter | May 3, 2018

In a brazen act, the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station was vandalized last week. The vandalism came in the form of writing spray painted on the front and side of the station that referenced a DEA agent killed in 1985, along with other cryptic phrases that might be nonsense. The crime was committed Thursday, April 26 at about 10:45 p.m. when surveillance cameras spotted the suspect approaching on a foot-powered scooter. The suspect then spray painted his message and quickly rode away.

Upon discovering the writing, deputies reviewed the footage caught on camera and were able to identify the suspect a few hours later. On Sunday, April 29, deputies arrested the suspect, a 26-year-old Castaic man, at his home without incident. He was booked on felony vandalism charges at the Santa Clarita Sheriff’s Station.

Vandalism is a fairly common crime, and odds are you’ve seen it many times. From writing scratched on bathroom walls to extravagant murals some folks refer to as street art, it’s all ultimately vandalism and therefore illegal. California Penal Code 594 PC covers vandalism and describes it as damaging, destroying, or defacing with graffiti or other written material, someone else’s property. The description of the crime allows for a broad interpretation, and some surprising things can be considered vandalism under the law. For example, if a married couple gets into an argument and one of them smashes a glass or a dish that they own together, it can be considered vandalism. So, too, can the otherwise innocuous act of writing one’s initials in wet cement. The bottom line is that if the property belongs to someone else (even if it also belongs to you) and you damage, destroy or deface it, you can be charged with vandalism.

The penalties for vandalism are pretty steep, given its ubiquity, and bail amounts can be set as high as $50,000. The crime can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances of the case and the value of the property that was damaged or destroyed. Generally, if the value was less than $400, the crime will be charged as a misdemeanor with the possible penalties of informal probation (with possible conditions including counseling, community service, drivers license suspension), up to one year in county jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000 ($5,000 for repeat-offenders). If the value of the property was $400 or more, the crime can be charged as a felony with the possible penalties of up to one year in county jail with probation or 16 months to three years in county jail, a fine of up to $10,000 (or $50,000 for repeat-offenders) and/or probation under the same conditions as above.

Last, but not least, when it’s municipal or community property that’s vandalized, it will most often be repaired using taxpayer funds.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | April 26, 2018

An unemployed 25-year-old Newhall man and a 37-year-old waiter from Santa Clarita were charged with possession of a device/instrument/paraphernalia. A 20-year-old butcher was arrested for attempting a residential burglary.

A retired 53-year-old transient was charged with trespassing on lands under cultivation. An unemployed 24-year-old Newhall man was arrested for disorderly conduct/loitering on a private property. A 40-year-old construction worker from Santa Clarita was arrested for refusing to leave a property upon request of a police officer.

A 23-year-old unemployed Valencia man was cited for showing a false ID to a peace officer. A 38-year-old tow truck driver from Porter Ranch was arrested for evading a police officer/driving in a reckless manner.

A 28-year-old teacher from Valencia was arrested for vandalism. An unemployed 22-year-old transient was charged with vandalism with loss valued at or greater than $400.

A 30-year-old unemployed Sun Valley man was arrested for a probation violation.

A 22-year-old landscaper from Castaic was arrested for carrying a concealed dirk or dagger. A 33-year-old firefighter from Pine Mountain was charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon/addict. And a 24-year-old plumber from Burbank was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, not a firearm, with great bodily injury.

A 20-year-old student from Lancaster was charged with corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant. A 29-year-old electrician from Newhall was arrested for battery against a former spouse. A 44-year-old self-employed Newhall woman was cited for battery.
A 23-year-old Saugus man who works in packaging was arrested for reckless driving.

A 21-year-old layout tech from Castaic was charged with driving with the knowledge that his license was suspended/revoked. And a 38-year-old Valencia woman who refused to give her occupation was arrested for driving with a license that was suspended/revoked for another reason.

DUIs with prior arrests included:
37-year-old unemployed Canyon Country man
22-year-old unemployed Canyon Country man
22-year-old cook from Valencia
30-year-old manager from Valencia

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
27-year-old unemployed Valencia man
29-year-old mechanic from San Fernando
44-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita woman
58-year-old cook from Lancaster
60-year-old construction worker from La Crescenta

Five Charged with 166 Counts in Largest Recycling Fraud Case in California History

| Police Blotter | April 26, 2018

Five people have been charged by the State of California, suspected of defrauding the state’s recycling program of over $80 million. The suspects include the owner and four employees of the Recycling Services Alliance Corporation who, according to State Attorney General Xavier Becerra, spent several years defrauding the state. They allegedly accepted recyclable cans and bottles purchased in other states, then forged the paperwork involved to make it appear as though they were purchased in California.

The scam is said to have been the largest ever perpetrated in the state in regard to recycling, and centered around the 5- and 10-cent deposits that are paid when someone buys beverages stored in recyclable containers. The deposits can be recouped by consumers who take the empty containers to recycling centers. The program is self-funded, and the centers themselves are supposed to only accept eligible containers that were sold in the State of California. The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery says that the program has been suffering from financial problems that has resulted in several private recycling centers having to close. It’s likely that the fraud allegedly perpetrated by the Recycling Services Alliance Corporation has had something to do with that.

In all, the five suspects have been charged with 166 counts, including grand theft, perjury, conspiracy, and recycling fraud.

California Penal Code 487 PC covers grand theft and describes the crime as the unlawful taking of someone else’s property, and that the property is valued at or above $950. Penal Code 487 is a “wobbler,” meaning that it can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony. Misdemeanor charges include the penalties of up to one year in county jail, while felony penalties include formal probation with up to one year in county jail or between 16 months and three years in county jail.

California Penal Code 118 PC covers perjury and describes the crime as deliberately giving false information while under oath. Perjury is always a felony under California law and the penalties include up to four years in California state prison. However, the sentencing is dependent upon the discretion of the judge, and could result in probation and no actual jail time.

Conspiracy is covered under California Penal Code 182 PC and is described as one individual agreeing with at least one other individual to commit a crime and one of those people commits an act in furtherance of that crime. Conspiracy charges are penalized dependent upon the type of conspiracy in which one is involved. Typically, if one is charged with conspiracy to commit a felony, then the penalties associated with the conspiracy charge will be the same as those of the original felony.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | April 20, 2018

A 38-year-old contractor from Littlerock, Calif. was arrested for burglary, and a 46-year-old security guard from Panorama City was brought up on charges of possession of burglary tools. A 24-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country was charged with shoplifting after a specified prior conviction.

An unemployed 45-year-old North Hills man was arrested for carrying a concealed dirk or dagger. A 33-year-old laborer from Canyon Country was arrested for making criminal threats. A 24-year-old tattoo artist from Stevenson Ranch, an unemployed 21-year-old Santa Clarita man and a 44-year-old driver from Santa Clarita were arrested for assault likely to produce great bodily injury. A 22-year-old unemployed Newhall man was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, not a firearm, with great bodily injury. A 26-year-old carpenter from Bakersfield was arrested for possessing a firearm with narcotics.

A 40-year-old welder from Saugus was cited for being under the influence of a controlled substance. A 27-year-old unemployed Los Angeles woman was cited for possession of controlled substance paraphernalia. An unemployed 27-year-old Valencia man and an unemployed 25-year-old Canyon Country woman were charged with possession of a controlled substance with specific prior arrests. And a 31-year-old field worker from Modesto was charged with transporting/selling a controlled substance.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
32-year-old unemployed Van Nuys man
31-year-old welder from Littlerock, Calif.
24-year-old unemployed Valencia man
37-year-old cook from Canyon Country

A 55-year-old mover from Long Beach was arrested for trespassing. And a 45-year-old Canyon Country woman who works in property management was cited for entering/occupying a property without consent. A 30-year-old server from Canoga Park was cited for trespassing lands under cultivation. A 61-year-old Simi Valley man was arrested for taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

DUIs with prior arrests included:
31-year-old construction worker from Saugus
49-year-old health care worker from
Canyon Country
38-year-old cook from Palmdale
22-year-old painter from Canyon Country
21-year-old Castaic man
28-year-old unemployed Saugus man
54-year-old construction worker from Santa Clarita
53-year-old retired Spring Valley man

Penal Code 350 PC Counterfeiting Marks

| Police Blotter | April 19, 2018

A recent bust that took place in downtown Los Angeles’ fashion district netted over $700,000 worth of phony cosmetics. The fraudulent products included popular brands like MAC, NARS and Urban Decay. The worst part about the counterfeit products wasn’t that consumers were being ripped off, but the fact that after testing, all of the products were found to contain lead, bacteria, and traces of animal feces. Authorities were first tipped off when consumers complained of rashes and other irritations of the skin after using the fake eyeliner, lipstick, and eye shadow.

According to authorities, the counterfeit products looked almost identical to authentic ones, though the cheap prices should have raised red flags with consumers.

Counterfeiting of merchandise, like makeup, falls under California Penal Code 350 PC. The law makes it illegal to sell, manufacture, or possess for sale, any counterfeit “mark.” A counterfeit “mark” refers to any fake trademark/brand that is identical to, or confusingly similar to, a mark that is registered with the U.S. Trademark Office or the California Secretary of State. The description provides for those who would, in an attempt to sneak past the law, slightly alter a company logo. They attempt to either pass a counterfeit product off as an authentic one by directly telling shoppers the product is genuine, or by hoping that the slight difference in marks goes unnoticed by the buyer.

Simply possessing knock-off goods isn’t enough to get one arrested, nor is buying them. In order to be charged with violating Penal Code 350 PC, one must knowingly possess the counterfeit marks with the intent of selling the items.

The penalties under PC 350 will depend on the value of the counterfeit goods involved, as well as their number. If fewer than 1,000 counterfeit items are involved, and the goods have a total fair market retail value of less than $950, the crime will be charged as a misdemeanor. The possible penalties for misdemeanor convictions include misdemeanor probation, up to six months in county jail and/or a fine of up to $10,000 for individuals or $200,000 for companies. However, if the total number of counterfeit marks exceeds 1,000, or if the fair market value of the goods is $950 or greater, the crime becomes a «wobbler» that can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony. If convicted on felony charges, defendants face the penalties of formal probation, 16 months to three years in county jail and/or a fine of up to $500,000 for individuals or $1,000,000 for companies. Additionally, when convicted of violating California Penal Code 350 PC, the court will order the asset forfeiture of all counterfeit marks and the goods that bear them, the machines and/or materials used to manufacture the counterfeit marks, and any vehicles used to transport them.

Last, if in selling or manufacturing counterfeit marks a person was killed or suffered great bodily injury, the charge is always a felony and the potential jail sentence is increased to 2 to 4 years in county jail.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | April 13, 2018

A 36-year-old laborer from Val Verde was picked up for failure to appear.

A 22-year-old mason from Newhall was arrested for battery on a non-cohabitating former spouse. A 25-year-old loader from Canyon Country was arrested for battery against a former spouse. A 31-year-old server from Santa Clarita was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, not a firearm.

A 27-year-old construction worker from Lancaster was arrested for forgery. A 50-year-old unemployed Canyon Country man was arrested for burglary.

A 49-year-old Torrance man was arrested for embezzlement of $400 or more. And a 37-year-old machinist from Whittier was cited for receiving known stolen property.

A 28-year-old housekeeper from Canyon Country was charged with avoiding registration compliance.

A 22-year-old picker/field worker from Orosi, Calif. was charged with evading a police officer: disregarding safety.

A 29-year-old nurse caregiver from Palmdale was charged with reckless driving.

A self-employed 41-year-old Canyon Country man was arrested for theft of personal property. And a 24-year-old bus boy from Santa Paula was cited for receiving known stolen property.

An unemployed 24-year-old Canyon Country man was charged with possession of a device/instrument/paraphernalia. 23-year-old Santa Clarita woman who works in the food industry was charged with possession of a controlled substance with specific prior arrests.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
31-year-old cook from Canoga Park
19-year-old baker from Santa Clarita
42-year-old unemployed Agua Dulce man
An unemployed 47-year-old Santa Clarita man was arrested for carrying a concealed dirk or dagger.

A 21-year-old Newhall man who refused to give his occupation was arrested for battery on a custodial officer/firefighter.

A 22-year-old warehouse supervisor from Santa Paula was arrested for manufacturing/selling/giving/lending/possessing metal knuckles.

A 30-year-old unemployed Canyon Country man was arrested for refusing to leave property upon request.

DUIs with prior arrests:
52-year-old unemployed Valencia man
31-year-old construction worker from Panorama City
21-year-old campus aide from Valencia
61-year-old janitor from Palmdale
33-year-old painting contractor from Canyon Country
47-year-old plumber from Newhall
36-year-old day laborer from Rialto
26-year-old mechanic from Rosamond
34-year-old construction worker from Newhall
24-year-old laborer from Palmdale
23-year-old mechanic from Lancaster
22-year-old mechanic from Palmdale
19-year-old barber from Sylmar
27-year-old culinary assistant from La Puente

PC 166 – Contempt of Court

| Police Blotter | April 12, 2018

California Penal Code 166 PC outlines the punishments for being in “contempt of court.” Those who are charged with violating PC 166 are usually people who perform behaviors that are considered disrespectful to the court process, including:

Inappropriately interrupting court proceedings by being excessively loud, engaging in disrespectful or disorderly conduct, or other behaviors considered to be disruptive
Willfully disobeying a lawfully issued court order
Refusing to perform your duties as a witness when in situations where you have no legal right to do so
Publishing extremely inaccurate or false accounts of court proceedings
Willfully and knowingly violating a protective or stay-away court order (also known as a restraining order) which involves domestic violence, elder abuse, or adult dependent abuse

You’ve probably seen fictional depictions of the first item on this list on television and in movies; it’s a fairly common courtroom trope. Being charged with contempt of court for being disruptive isn’t nearly as common in real life as it is on TV. Usually when someone is charged with contempt of court, it’s because they violated a court order, such as the terms of their probation. Technically, when someone violates their probation, they’re engaging in the willful disobedience of a court order, however they’re charged separately in a California probation violation hearing.

Aside from probation violations, in order to be convicted of having violated a court order, a few things have to be proven: the judge must have issued a legal order, you must have known about the order and had the ability to comply with it but willfully chosen not to do so. For example, suppose a judge grants a restraining order to the victim of domestic violence that stipulates that his/her former partner must completely avoid contact with the victim. It isn’t too difficult because they live far enough away from each other that accidentally meeting up socially isn’t likely. Despite this, the person who must refrain from initiating contact calls the victim on the phone every day. Since they willfully chose not to heed the judge’s order, it’s possible that the perpetrator will be charged with contempt of court.

Most violations of contempt of court are misdemeanors, and are punishable by a maximum fine of $1,000 and up to six months in county jail. However, there are a few exceptions with harsher sentences. The individual in the example outlined above, who has a restraining order for committing domestic violence, could face up to one year in county jail and a maximum fine of $1,000 if convicted of a misdemeanor. However, if the charge is increased to the felony level, the suspect faces a maximum fine of up to $10,000 and 16 months to three years in California state prison.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | April 7, 2018

A 43-year-old musician from Santa Fe Springs was cited for making annoying repeated phone calls to a residence.

A 48-year-old Canyon Country man who works in fire protection was arrested for spousal rape by force/violence/fear. An unemployed 26-year-old Santa Paula man was charged with evading a police officer: disregarding safety. A 56-year-old musician from Valencia was arrested for preventing/dissuading a witness/victim from repossession.

An unemployed 18-year-old Canyon Country man was cited for battery on a non-cohabitating former spouse. And an unemployed 20-year-old Canyon Country man was arrested for terrorizing/causing fear. A self-employed 46-year-old Castaic man was arrested for carrying a concealed dirk or dagger.

A 32-year-old construction worker from Acton was cited for possession of burglary tools. A 48-year-old customer service rep from Mission Hills was arrested for burglary.

A 26-year-old transient from Castaic was picked up for theft of personal property. And a 36-year-old bartender from Santa Clarita was charged with receiving known stolen property valued at more than $950.

A 22-year-old Newhall man who works in security and an unemployed 21-year-old Garden Grove man were arrested for taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent. A 36-year-old mover from Newhall was charged with driving with a license that was suspended/revoked after a prior offense.

An unemployed 29-year-old Santa Clarita man was charged with possession of 28.5 grams or less of marijuana.

A 25-year-old compounder from Pacoima was arrested for engaging in an illegal speeding contest.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
39-year-old mechanic from Pacoima
34-year-old unemployed Castaic man
33-year-old unemployed Frazier Park man
38-year-old unemployed Twentynine Palms man
42-year-old unemployed Newhall man
56-year-old mechanic from Acton
58-year-old unemployed Newhall man
54-year-old handyman from Santa Clarita

DUIs with prior arrests included:
48-year-old self-employed Stevenson Ranch man
41-year-old software engineer from Santa Clarita
60-year-old retired Canyon Country man
21-year-old construction worker from Reseda
21-year-old laborer from Newhall
25-year-old set dresser from La Crescenta
21-year-old construction worker from Reseda
60-year-old unemployed Palmdale woman

Tips for Preventing the Dangers of Online Dating

| Police Blotter | April 6, 2018

Law enforcement, as well as a woman who was allegedly victimized by an ex-contestant of “Millionaire Matchmaker,” are asking potential victims to come forward and tell their stories.

According to the alleged victim’s story, she had been communicating with the suspect over a dating website for two months in 2015 before they finally decided to meet up in person. Once they met, the victim allegedly endured physical and sexual assaults and abuse at the hands of the suspect, and was deeply traumatized as a result.

She claims that the severe emotional damage she incurred during her time with the suspect has lead to losing her job, her home, her friends, and has caused her to develop severe social phobias.

The suspect is about to go to trial on charges related to drugging and raping three other women in 2014 and 2015. Those charges include sexual penetration by a foreign object, attempted sodomy by use of force, forcible rape, forcible oral copulation, rape by use of drugs, rape of an unconscious person and administering a drug to commit rape.

This story, and others like it, are an all-too-common occurrence when it comes to online dating. Most people don’t have ill intentions, but others can be quite the opposite. Below are a few precautions you should take into consideration if you ever decide to meet someone in person who you previously met online:

Tip #1: Always meet in a public place. Never, ever go directly to someone’s home, and always meet somewhere in which there will be a lot of other foot traffic. A restaurant, the mall, anywhere that you’ll both be seen and heard. If the person to whom you’re speaking doesn’t want to meet in a public space and instead prefers to meet somewhere private, you may want to rethink meeting with them at all.

Tip #2: Tell someone where you’re going, when you’re leaving, and when you expect to be home. Ensure that your friend or family member also has the contact and identifying info of the person you’re dating (name, phone number, address, etc.). If your plans change mid-date, be sure to update whoever it is you’ve been contacting.
Tip #3: Drive yourself to the date, and drive yourself home. You don’t want to be at anyone else’s mercy as to when you can leave or return home. If you’re getting bad vibes for any reason, you can always leave.

Tip #4: Don’t drink. Alcohol weakens your inhibitions, and you may do things while under the influence of alcohol that you wouldn’t do sober.  If you’re meeting someone for the first time, you’ll want to have your wits about you. If things go well on subsequent dates, you can choose whether or not you wish to consume alcohol then.

Above all, the most important thing to remember is that you are in control. You don’t owe your prospective date anything, regardless of whether they’re paying or not. If for whatever reason you feel uncomfortable, you have the right to get up and leave.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | March 30, 2018

An unemployed 20-year-old Canyon Country man was cited for possession of tools with the intent to commit vandalism/graffiti.

Three individuals from Simi Valley – a 22-year-old woman who works in sales, a 26-year-old man who is self-employed and a 21-year-old man who is unemployed – were arrested for robbery.

A 35-year-old laborer from Little Rock, Calif. and a 22-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country were arrested for carrying a concealed dirk/dagger.

A 52-year-old salesman from Northridge was charged with corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant.

An unemployed 43-year-old Magalia, Calif. man and a 35-year-old unemployed Lancaster man were each arrested for disobeying a domestic relations court order. A 24-year-old plumber from Canyon Country was arrested for battery on a non-cohabitating former spouse.

An unemployed 22-year-old Canyon Country man was charged with preventing/dissuading a witness/victim from a test. And a 20-year-old Stevenson Ranch man who works in radio was cited for resisting an officer.

An unemployed 35-year-old Los Angeles man was charged with transporting/selling a controlled substance. And a 37-year-old gardener from Newhall was picked up for possession of a device/instrument paraphernalia.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
43-year-old site representative from
Santa Clarita
31-year-old machine tech from Arleta
38-year-old unemployed Canyon
Country woman
37-year-old gardener from Newhall
51-year-old disabled Santa Clarita man
19-year-old unemployed Hollister, Calif. woman

A 29-year-old cleaning worker from Reseda was cited for driving without a license, and a 29-year-old Valencia man who works in insurance was cited for driving with a license that was suspended/revoked after a prior offense. Also, a 21-year-old construction worker from Castaic was charged with taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

DUIs with prior arrests included:
47-year-old yoga instructor from Valencia
32-year-old mechanic from Palmdale
24-year-old chef from Canyon Country
33-year-old mortgage consultant from Saugus

California Penal Code 243 (b) and (c) PC Battery on a Peace Officer

| Police Blotter | March 29, 2018

Recently a man was arrested outside the Chase Bank on The Old Road after he got into a physical altercation with a Santa Clarita Sheriff’s Station deputy. According to reports, the man had been loitering behind the bank throughout the day and was reported several times. When a deputy showed up and tried to see what was going on, the suspect refused to answer questions and “a little altercation” ensued. Nobody appeared to be injured during the scuffle, and while an ambulance was called to the scene, no one was transported to the hospital.

When someone gets into a fight or another type of physical altercation with the police, it’s possible to be arrested and charged with violating California Penal Code 243(b) or (c) PC – battery on a peace/police officer. This law makes it illegal to willfully and unlawfully touch a police officer, as well as other protected officials, in a harmful or offensive manner while he or she is engaged in their duties. The other protected officials include, but are not limited to, custodial officers, firefighters, EMTs, paramedics, process servers, probation department employees and doctors and nurses providing emergency care.

The spirit of PC 243 is to allow the protected individuals to conduct their duties unhindered by bystanders or others who may want to obstruct what’s going on. As such, one can only be charged with violating PC 243 if they are alleged to have committed battery on someone while that person was in the process of performing his or her duties. For example, suppose someone gets into a physical altercation outside of a bar with another individual who happens to be an off-duty EMT. The person who committed battery will not be charged with violating PC 243 because the EMT was not in the middle of performing their duties. However, it is still possible to be charged with another crime, such as simple battery (242 PC).

Violations of California Penal Code 243(b) – battery on a peace/police officer – are misdemeanors. The possible penalties include misdemeanor probation, up to one year in county jail and/or a maximum fine of $2,000. However, if the battery results in injury, the charge can be increased to felony battery on a peace/police officer under California Penal Code 243(c). Under the law, an “injury” is described as any physical injury that requires professional medical treatment. If convicted of felony-level charges, the possible penalties include felony probation, 16 months to 3 years in county jail and/or a fine of up to $10,000.

Police Blotter

| Police Blotter | March 23, 2018

A 38-year-old video editor from North Hollywood, a 32-year-old cook from Newhall and a 31-year-old nursery worker from Newhall were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant.

A 29-year-old unemployed Stevenson Ranch woman was charged with retaking land after she was legally removed. And a 22-year-old unemployed Castaic man was arrested for refusal to leave a property upon request of the owner. Also, an unemployed 52-year-old Fallbrook man was charged with entering/remaining on posted property. A 40-year-old laborer from Fillmore and an unemployed 33-year-old Saugus woman were charged with refusing to leave property upon request of a police officer.

A 50-year-old installer from Newhall was arrested for identity theft. A 19-year-old door-to-door salesman from Newhall was arrested for vandalism.

A 26-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita woman was arrested for robbery. A 37-year-old public official from Palmdale and a 25-year-old construction worker from Bakersfield allegedly took a vehicle without the owner’s consent.

A 48-year-old artist from Valencia was cited for tampering with a vehicle.

A 47-year-old construction worker from Oakland was picked up for transporting/selling a controlled substance.

Possession of a controlled substance charges went to:
36-year-old mechanic from North Hills
22-year-old unemployed Van Nuys man
26-year-old service clerk from Valencia
32-year-old landscaper from Van Nuys
32-year-old programmer from Saugus
34-year-old mechanic from Bakersfield
21-year-old unemployed Castaic man
18-year-old secretary from West Covina

DUIs with prior arrests included:
22-year-old waitress from Canyon Country
39-year-old unemployed Bakersfield man
22-year-old unemployed Los Angeles woman
28-year-old cook from Newhall
28-year-old machinist from Santa Clarita
33-year-old self-employed Valencia man
22-year-old construction worker from Stevenson Ranch
62-year-old mechanic from Los Angeles
29-year-old operator from Acton
19-year-old Rosamond woman who works on a production line
25-year-old server from Palmdale
36-year-old Canyon Country tile worker

Various Types of Theft Charges

| Police Blotter | March 22, 2018

Recently, a Los Angeles man was arrested and charged with dozens of felony counts of grand theft, forgery, and identity theft after a nine-year white-collar crime spree. According to authorities, R. Gutierrez and W. Rodriguez prepared fraudulent structural engineering plans, reports, and other relevant documents using the name of Palos Verdes Engineering Co. – a legitimate engineering firm – in order to dupe people into believing that the documents had been reviewed and approved by an actual licensed civil engineer. They are alleged to have perpetrated their scheme from 2003 to 2014, and it’s believed that there are more than 735 victims.

Grand theft is covered under California Penal Code 487 PC and described as the unlawful taking of someone’s property that is valued over $950. In California, grand theft can be carried out in a number of ways:

  • Grand theft by larceny – The most prominent type, grand theft by larceny is when someone physically carries off someone else’s property.
  • Grand theft by false pretenses – Theft by false pretense occurs when someone knowingly and intentionally deceives another (usually by lying) in an attempt to persuade the person to let the thief take possession of the victim’s property.
  • Grand theft by trick – It involves obtaining property owned by someone else using fraud or deceit.
  • Grand theft by embezzlement – It is defined as fraudulently using property that you were entrusted with by the owner for your own gain.

Grand theft is a “wobbler” that can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony. Misdemeanor charges include up to one year in county jail. Felony charges include felony probation with up to one year in county jail.

Forgery is covered under California Penal Code 470 PC and is described as knowingly signing someone else’s name, faking a seal or someone else’s handwriting, changing or falsifying any legal document, and faking, altering or presenting as genuine any document pertaining to money, finances or property. Misdemeanor charges for forgery carry the possible penalties of up to one year in county jail, a $1,000 fine, restitution and informal probation. Felony charges for forgery include 16 months to three years in county jail, a fine of up to $10,000, informal or formal probation, and payment of restitution to any victims.

Finally, California Penal Code 530.5 PC covers identity theft. Identity theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in America, and can be charged in a wide variety of circumstances. The legal definition essentially states that identity theft is the unlawful or fraudulent use of another person’s identifying information. Like the preceding crimes, identity theft is a “wobbler.” Misdemeanor charges include up to one year in county jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000. Felony penalties include 16 months to three years in county jail and up to $10,000 in fines.

Unfortunately for the many alleged victims, since neither defendant was a licensed, professional civil engineer, many of the structures built to their specifications may be unsafe and need to be rebuilt.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | March 16, 2018

An unemployed 25-year-old Yucca Valley man and two men from Los Angeles – an unemployed 25-year-old, a 22-year-old construction worker from Newhall and a 26-year-old man who works in production, were arrested for burglary. An unemployed 28-year-old Valencia man was charged with getting credit/other’s ID.

A 23-year-old gardener from Canyon Country was arrested for annoying/molesting a child, with prior arrests.

A 19-year-old construction worker from Canyon Country was arrested for assault likely to produce great bodily injury. A 61-year-old self-employed Saugus woman was arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant. And a 46-year-old Valencia woman who declined to give her occupation was arrested for battery against a former spouse.

An unemployed 28-year-old Santa Clarita man was charged with carrying a concealed dirk or dagger on his person. A 33-year-old lineman from Lancaster was cited for indecent exposure/illegal entry into an occupied dwelling. A 35-year-old salesman from Canyon Country was arrested for arson of property.

An unemployed 22-year-old Castaic man was arrested for violation of parole for a felony.

A 56-year-old engineer from Santa Clarita was arrested for preventing/dissuading a witness/victimized by force/threat.

An unemployed 31-year-old Saugus woman and an unemployed Columbia, Missouri couple were arrested for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon/addict, etc.

A 25-year-old laborer from Castaic was charged with possession/purchase of a controlled substance for sale.

An unemployed 58-year-old Northridge man was cited for possession of a device/instrument/paraphernalia.

Possession of a controlled substance with specific priors
22-year-old self-employed Santa Clarita man
41-year-old Palmdale man who works in production
32-year-old cook from Corona
52-year-old unemployed Castaic man

DUIs with prior arrests included:
25-year-old Baldwin Park woman who works in accounting
23-year-old Sylmar man who works for the studios
32-year-old unemployed Valencia man
32-year-old manager from Canyon Country
29-year-old manager from Santa Clarita
33-year-old Santa Clarita man who works in in-home care
40-year-old truck driver from Compton
27-year-old FedEx driver from Santa Clarita
25-year-old driver from Castaic

California Penal Code 32 PC Accessory After the Fact

| Police Blotter | March 15, 2018

Under California law, there are two parties to a crime: principals and accessories. A principal is someone who participates in the crime either before or during its commission, while an accessory is someone who helps the perpetrator of the crime after it’s been committed by aiding in their escape from arrest, trial, conviction or punishment. For example, suppose two individuals intend to burglarize the storage room of someone they know. One person obtains a copy of the key to the storage room and hands it off to the second person, who does the actual burglarizing. Afterward, the person who robbed the storage room is given a place to hide out by a third person who had nothing to do with the initial crime. The first two individuals, those involved in the commission of the burglary, would be considered principals while the third person would be considered an accessory after the fact.

An individual can be charged with being an accessory after the fact under a variety of circumstances, including:

  • Lying to the police to conceal a suspect’s whereabouts
  • Concealing the perpetrator themselves
  • Helping the perpetrator flee the scene of the crime
  • Destroying/concealing physical evidence

Simply providing some form of assistance to the perpetrator of a crime is not necessarily in-and-of-itself enough to have someone charged with violating Penal Code 32 PC and thus becoming an accessory after the fact. It’s imperative that the would-be accessory knows that the perpetrator committed a felony, and that their actions are assisting the perpetrator in escaping arrest, trial, conviction, or punishment. Destroying evidence in a crime that one doesn’t know happened, giving a friend a place to stay, or any other action that would lead one to be considered an accessory, doesn’t count under certain conditions. It does not apply if the person doing the assisting isn’t aware that the person they’re helping committed a felony or that the actions they’re undertaking are helping them elude justice. Additionally, if someone is put under duress and pressured or coerced into acting as an accessory after the fact, even if they know a felony has been committed, it’s possible to avoid charges.

Acting as an accessory is less severe than actually committing the felony, and the potential punishments reflect this. Acting as an accessory is a “wobbler,” which can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony. Misdemeanor penalties include a $5,000 fine and up to one year in county jail, while felony penalties include 16 months to 3 years in California state prison.

Local Crime

| Police Blotter | March 9, 2018

A 50-year-old accountant from Saugus was arrested for grand theft of money/property valued at more than $400. An unemployed 50-year-old Canyon Country man and a 27-year-old warehouse handler from San Diego were arrested for burglary. A 69-year-old woman from San Gabriel who works in hospital admitting was cited for theft of personal property.

A 37-year-old banker from Castaic was arrested for forgery/counterfeiting a public/corporate seal.

A 31-year-old construction worker from Sherman Oaks was arrested for possessing a firearm with narcotics. An unemployed 32-year-old Palmdale man was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, not a firearm, with great bodily injury.

An unemployed 75-year-old Castaic woman and a 54-year-old Canyon Country woman with an unknown occupation were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant. An unemployed 50-year-old Santa Clarita man was arrested for battery against a former spouse.

A 27-year-old construction worker from Newhall was arrested for failure to appear for a traffic warrant. A 41-year-old Stevenson Ranch man who works in film lighting was charged with manufacturing/selling/giving/lending/possessing a leaded cane.

An 18-year-old self-employed Castaic man was charged with possession of a controlled substance while armed with a loaded firearm. A 21-year-old Newhall man and an unemployed 22-year-old Canyon Country man were cited for possession of a device/instrument/paraphernalia.

A 21-year-old car salesman was charged with concealing/profiting from a controlled substance.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance went to:
47-year-old unemployed Valencia man
24-year-old unemployed Newhall man
20-year-old unemployed Castaic man
39-year-old electrician from Newhall
19-year-old unemployed Newhall man
25-year-old Canyon Country man
38-year-old unemployed Frazier Park man
40-year-old unemployed Palmdale man
55-year-old mechanic from Lake Hughes

DUIs with prior arrests included:
23-year-old machinist from Palmdale
50-year-old Santa Clarita man
41-year-old research scientist from Castaic
62-year-old mobile detailer from Palmdale
29-year-old driver from Canyon Country
35-year-old Sacramento man
59-year-old unemployed Castaic man
58-year-old mechanic from Palmdale
33-year-old driver from Palmdale
28-year-old Stevenson Ranch man
32-year-old construction worker from Agua Dulce
29-year-old chef from Santa Clarita
52-year-old welder from Valencia

The JUUL – A New and Secretive Way for Kids to Vape

| Police Blotter | March 9, 2018

A recent trend in vaping has been making its way into schools around the country. Known as the “JUUL,” this e-cigarette has the size and shape of an unassuming flash drive, making it easy for children to get past their parents by hiding it among their school supplies. The vapor from these devices makes it easy for teens to use them just about anywhere; the cloud of smoke exhaled by users lacks the tell-tale stench of traditional nicotine smoke, replacing it with sweeter scents like cherry and vanilla. According to recent surveys, e-cigarettes have replaced traditional cigarettes as the go-to smoking device, thanks to their ease of use.

The JUUL was developed for smokers of both regular cigarettes and e-cigarettes who would prefer to have something smaller, sleeker, and easier to carry around than a pack of smokes or a clunky e-cig. JUULs are small, slender, and provide smokers with a nicotine-containing vapor via small “JUUL pods” that, according to the company, “contain the same amount of nicotine as a pack of cigarettes.” The devices themselves are relatively simple, using the internal battery to heat a liquid that contains nicotine into a vapor that is then inhaled by the user. The device itself can easily be recharged in a computer’s USB port.

The purpose of the JUUL is like that of any other e-cigarette company, to provide smokes with an alternative to cigarettes that’s safer for the user and the people around them. While some studies have been done showing that e-cigarettes are safer in some ways than traditional cigarettes, they haven’t been around long enough for long-term studies to discern their effects over the course of one’s life. It’s entirely possible that the vapor from e-cigarettes ends up being harmless; however, the opposite could also prove true in time. It’s generally wise not to inhale anything other than fresh, clean air (or as clean as one can get in the Los Angeles area), because human lungs didn’t evolve to scrub modern chemicals from the bloodstream or from the lungs themselves.

While e-cigarettes like the JUUL aren’t meant for anyone under the legal age, teens tend to get their hands on them, nonetheless, and easily become addicted to nicotine through repeated use. An addiction to nicotine is a powerful one, and it’s very difficult to quit – just ask smokers. The fact that the JUUL and other e-cigarettes offer a quick, easy fix that’s difficult to identify by parents and educators makes their use even more problematic. Where cigarette smoke can be smelled from several yards away through ventilation systems, under doors, and through open windows, e-cigarette vapor clouds are nowhere near as pungent, and often mimic the scent of body sprays used by teen girls.

If you’re worried about your teen getting their hands on an e-cigarette like the JUUL, and subsequently becoming addicted, the best thing to do is to talk to them. Peer pressure is huge among young people, and coupled with the desire to fit in, some kids can end up addicted without ever purchasing a device themselves. Explain to them the nature of addiction and the health risks that come from nicotine exposure. You can’t be around your child 24/7, but educating them against the use of products like this can help ensure you don’t need to be.

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | March 2, 2018

A 68-year-old retired Canyon Country woman, a 47-year-old chef from Santa Clarita and an unemployed 19-year-old Sylmar man were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant. A 41-year-old nursing assistant from Saugus, a 49-year-old probation officer and a 54-year-old teacher from Canyon Country were each arrested for battery against a former spouse.

A 23-year-old dishwasher from Newhall was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon on a police officer/fireman, without a firearm, with great bodily injury. And a 19-year-old dishwasher from Santa Clarita was brought up on charges of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger. Also, a 21-year-old cashier from Santa Clarita was charged with manufacturing/selling/giving/lending possessing leaded cane, etc.

A 19-year-old unemployed Lancaster man and an unemployed 34-year-old Newhall man were each arrested for burglary. A self-employed 27-year-old Chatsworth man was picked up for trespassing on closed lands.

A 54-year-old carpenter from Eagle Rock was cited for drunk driving/addict driving a vehicle.

A 22-year-old waiter from Castaic was charged with possession of a device/instrument/paraphernalia.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance included:
27-year-old self-employed Newhall man
19-year-old painter from Castaic
49-year-old Agua Dulce man who does movie stunts
56-year-old mechanic from Acton
33-year-old electrician from Fresno
42-year-old maintenance tech from Lancaster
31-year-old landscaper from North Hills
31-year-old unemployed Santa Clarita man
32-year-old cook from Saugus
19-year-old gym manager from Saugus
52-year-old general contractor from Val Verde

DUIs with prior arrests included:
22-year-old picker from Palmdale
24-year-old bartender from Valencia
33-year-old plumber from N. Hollywood
43-year-old construction worker from Acton
24-year-old host from Sunland
30-year-old unemployed Compton man
30-year-old cook from Panorama City
33-year-old manufacturer from Lancaster
22-year-old fruit picker from Oxnard

California Penal Code 647(j)(4) PC Revenge Porn, a Serious Subject

| Police Blotter | March 1, 2018

Model and entrepreneur Blac Chyna has recently acknowledged that she’s likely going to file a police report after discovering that a sex tape of her and ex-boyfriend Mechie was leaked online. This is the second time in 8 months that Blac Chyna has been the alleged victim of revenge porn after Rob Kardashian famously posted explicit photos of her to Instagram without her consent. Regarding the recent incident, a representative for Mechie confirmed that it was him in the video, and that while Mechie did film the video, he was not the one who posted it.

California Penal Code 647(j)(4) PC covers nonconsensual pornography aka “revenge porn.” It has been so named because videos and/or pictures are often released by jilted lovers looking to “get back” at someone they feel wronged them somehow. The legal definition of 647(j)(4) PC is:

  • Possessing an image of an intimate body part of another identifiable person, or an image of that person engaged in sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation or masturbation
    Intentionally distributing that image
  • There was an understanding between the people in the image that it would not be made public and remain private
  • You know or should know that the release of the image would cause the person in it serious emotional distress and
  • The person in the image suffers serious emotional distress

In order for someone to “intentionally distribute” an image, they don’t have to distribute the image personally; they can also arrange, specifically request, or intentionally cause another person to distribute the image.

The law specifies that an individual is not guilty of violating 647(j)(4) PC when they distribute an image:

  • In the course of reporting unlawful activity
  • In compliance with a subpoena or other order for use in legal proceedings or
  • In the course of lawful public proceeding

Revenge porn is a misdemeanor under California law, but no less serious an offense. The penalties for a conviction include misdemeanor probation, up to six months in county jail, and/or a fine of up to $1,000. For repeat-offenders, the penalties increase to up to one year in county jail and a possible fine of $2,000.

Revenge porn is a serious crime, and has been responsible for severe emotional distress – including suicide – on more than one occasion. While the penalty for violating 647(j)(4) PC is a misdemeanor, it’s possible to be charged with additional (and more serious) crimes, depending on what happens as a result of distributing the image(s).

Bad Boys and Girls

| Police Blotter | February 23, 2018

An unemployed 19-year-old local transient was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, a firearm. An unemployed 24-year-old Canyon Country man was charged with carrying a concealed dirk or dagger.

An unemployed 50-year-old Santa Clarita man, in addition to a 49-year-old truck driver and a 29-year-old nurse, both from Canyon Country, were arrested for corporal injury on a spouse/cohabitant. A 43-year-old Valencia man who is a lead man in the studios was arrested for battery against a former spouse.

An unemployed 29-year-old Lancaster woman, an unemployed 30-year-old Santa Clarita woman and an unemployed 21-year-old Canyon Country man were arrested for burglary.

A 37-year-old unemployed Los Angeles man and a 27-year-old laborer from North Hills were arrested for taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent. A 23-year-old food service worker from Palmdale was brought up on charges of driving with a license that was suspended/revoked for reckless driving.

An unemployed 60-year-old Castaic man was arrested for disobeying a domestic relations court order and a 41-year-old construction worker from Valencia was cited for failure to appear for a traffic warrant.

An unemployed 24-year-old Newhall man was arrested for vandalism with a loss valued at $400 or greater. And a 33-year-old operations manager from Newhall was charged with vandalism.

A 62-year-old maintenance worker from Canyon Country and an unemployed 26-year-old Valencia man were charged with possession of a narcotic/controlled substance. A 20-year-old waitress from Saugus was charged with possession of a device/instrument/paraphernalia. And a 37-year-old dog groomer from Granada Hills was picked up for being under the influence of a controlled substance.

Charges of possession of a controlled substance included:
28-year-old unemployed Newhall man
20-year-old unemployed Valencia man
37-year-old food server from Valencia
45-year-old unemployed Castaic man

DUIs with prior arrests included:
30-year-old supervisor from Redondo Beach
26-year-old package handler from Northridge
48-year-old welder from Bakersfield
44-year-old cook from Los Angeles
24-year-old crew chief from Rosamond
65-year-old manager from Valencia

Page 1 of 251 2 3 25

Doug’s Rant – Video Edition

  • WatchDoug's Rant May 18, 2018
  • WatchDoug's Rant June 16, 2017