While everyone knows that the proud home of Randy Adams has been harassing perfectly legal parolees for years, if it weren’t for the FBI breathing down their necks our own Burbank Police Department would be doing the same thing:
Police arrested a 25-year-old man who was on parole for sex trafficking after he saw the officers and ran the other way.
The man, Von Correia, is on parole for a 2010 conviction for assault with a deadly weapon and was talking on a cell phone about 12:35 a.m. on the 1600 block of East Colorado Street when he saw a patrol car, turned around and began running, according to Glendale police reports.
Hate to interfere and be technical here, but first they say he’s on parole for sex trafficking, and then a sentence later they say it’s for assault. Can someone please get their stories straight?
We’ve asked this question before- does this local newspaper have an editor? A real one? The official wackiness continues:
Meanwhile, several witnesses reported seeing Correia run through various parking lots, including “sneaking” around a motel on Colorado, according to reports.
When police eventually found Correia walking away from the motel, he allegedly told them that he didn’t run away and was instead “trying to find a place to pee.”
Correia reportedly told police that he was visiting a friend at the Best Western Inn in Eagle Rock and was waiting for his fiancé to pick him up.
But his alleged fiancé, 26-year-old Fallon Hutchinson, told officers she became acquainted with Correia about two months ago and only knew him as “Pharaoh,” Glendale Police Sgt. Tom Lorenz said.
Hutchinson, who had an outstanding warrant for soliciting prostitution, drove from Fresno to Glendale to meet Correia because he told her he had a hotel, Lorenz said.
Lorenz said there was no indication that the pair was soliciting prostitution from the Eagle Rock hotel.
Police arrested Hutchinson in connection with the outstanding warrant and Correia on suspicion of resisting arrest.
So what was the base arrest? The courts have ruled repeatedly that cops can’t just arrest someone for “resisting arrest.” They have to try to arrest you for something else before they can say you were resisting.
They’ve also ruled as well that there’s no crime in just running from the police. Actually, this guy should probably be glad that they didn’t out-and-out tase him for his rude show of disrespect, but that’s another story.****
Now we know that the cops are our local heroes, and who in Glendale just happen to have the odd propensity of playing judge and jury on their own in order to keep people in jail who’ve already been released. These particular cops don’t like the idea of “parole,” and so what they do now is go around and harass and follow and setup everyone they know who is on that list.
And they’re quite proud of this, too. They even have a top-cop over there who runs around with a PowerPoint presentation to try and scare people into thinking how dangerous “Jerry Brown” and the “Legislature” (read, the Democrats) have been in releasing hardened felons into our community. Only he leaves out the fact that it’s the non-violent jailbirds who are being given an early release.
And of course, the local Times affiliate publishes these idiotic press releases of theirs intact, as gospel. An independent press that questions the actions of an overbearing police department, one which actively engages in questionable harassment tactics against mostly minority residents?
Where do you think we live?
Now the really idiotic thing about this phony Glendale “arrest” is that if these cops had actually kept this guy under direct surveillance like they said, then they might have caught him in the act of doing something that really could have put him away. If he was indeed a “sex trafficker.”
But they wanted to play Rambo instead, and so they blew it. And of course, instead of asking questions about this clear fuckup, the rubes only cheer.
**** Even in this case (which the naysayers will cite) the Court ruled that there had to be a base charge or incident which provoked the need to question a suspect, and that it had to be in a high-crime area. No such exigencies are apparent in this particular Glendale news story.
So there, police defenders. The Court also ruled that there is no express, general “bright line” right for departments to invoke this.