Wednesday, May 24, 2006

May 24

BCrime exclusive: "Get in on it" is not just a crappy slogan, it's also soon-to-be crappy tv ad campaign filming now! Actors are currently attempting to film a musical jingle in spots like Fort McHenry and environs, but a source from the set says "the lyrics were so awkward the actors kept fucking 'em up!" The city plans to spend $1.2 million with Carton Donofrio Partners.

Trial updates:
At an arraignment this morning, Walter Jackson-Hill, the policeman charged with accepting bribes to make charges go away and other counts, pled not guilty. The court set a trial date of July 26 before Judge Alfred Nance.

At arraignment this morning Jobrea Lodge and Sherray Douglas, charged with the attempted murder of Det. Dante Hemingway, pled not guilty. The court set a trial date of August 7 before Judge Alfred Nance.

At an arraignment this morning, Che Christopher Jackson, the "Rim Job" cop charged with theft, pled not guilty. The court set a trial date of July 28 before Judge Alfred Nance.

A man was shot to death while driving early this morning, murder 103 (unless it's ruled a suicide, or 104 if yesterday's stabbing victim dies, 105 if Whitney Wiley dies).

Whitney Wiley, 19, was shot in the head and dumped at the Sinai emergency room entrance by a 1993 Cadillac Fleetwood.

A 10-year-old girl stabbed a 12-year-old girl at Stewart Hill Elementary.

No jail time for Greg Raymond.

Viva la Magnet Bar!

Three inmates were shanked at Jessup.

flushtoiletSomebody went to Calvert Hall: The Examiner has a serious boner for this Loyola drug-flushing story! Now there's another follow-up (on the cover!) in which alum Joe Curran defends the school, plus a question-mark-laden editorial (C-). Answer key for private school students only: yes, no, yes, Boy's Latin is punishment, yes (see previous), yes (see previous), define "punishment," yes (see previous), please rephrase the question, why are you asking me, it's your editorial, dude! May I be excused? I've got an away game.

Far-flung pervs dept.: A federal case may be persued for accused Internet predator/rapist William Henry Ransley III of Finksburg. And in Easton, Alan Roger Travers, 43, is charged with 52 counts related to filming guys changing and showering at the Y. And Brian Doyle, a former Department of Homeland Security press aide from Silver Spring was extradited to Florida and pled not guilty to 23 counts related to attempting to solicit sex from someone whom he thought was an underage girl (but was really a Polk County detective).

14 comments:

John Galt said...

truth in advertising dictates:


Get Over On It

or

Get Out Of It

Anonymous said...

REminds me of that song "Get Down On It"

Emptyman said...

In the Raymond story, I especially like the MADD busybody boo-hooing about something that's none of her goddamn business.

The Cybrarian said...

As a boo-hooing busybody, I resent that. I mean, it's fine, right and good that the judge took the victim's family's wishes into consideration, but Raymond still should have been charged with vehicular manslaughter. He did slaughter a man. With a vehicle.

Saimon Fitzyerald said...

As someone who was not particularly convinced at first with the numbers debate as a political weapon against O'Malley, I wonder if Cybrarian and BaltimoreCrime are going to accept the official 2006 murder numbers or be a point of protest against them.

I think particularly of the case of Julia Bousaria's stabbing on Druid Hill Avenue. Putting this killing in the "pending" file because there isn't proof of murder sounds suspicious. Has there been any talk of the forensics of that case? Is there any reason to believe that it was a suicide besides the lack of witnesses?

John Galt said...

Simon,

The reason to believe is... BELIEVE, of course. I mean, do you honestly think a bunch of mobtown politicians would... lie?

'Get Stabbed In It.'

Anonymous said...

although i do think that BPD does do a lot of shady stuff to make their crime stats appear lower than they actually are, don't forget that in this year's official tally there are no less than 4 murders wherein the victim died in a previous of wounds that were inflicted in a previous year. the only reason they count as 2006 murders is because the medical examiner did not get around to ruling them homicides until this year. i don't understand how hamm or o'malley or whoever allows this kind of inflation when they do everything in their power to otherwise make crime levels appear lower than they actually are. it doesn't make sense!

The Cybrarian said...

I would actually excpect the discrepancy between homicides (the ME's office) and the BPD's classification of murder would be higher, considering the ME's office currently also has cases pending. The medical examiner decides if there's a homicide, aka someone has died at the hands of someone else. The courts make it a murder by showing intent was there. As of this February the 2005 numbers were 293 homicides and the police reported 269 murders. By February, 26 of 2005's murder cases had been cleared by a prosecution, 110 victims had cases pending in courts, 141 cases were open (which adds up to 298, note cases can have multiple victims and/or multiple killers) (Chuck you have to check my math on that -- no givebacks!) But anyway, it's reasonable that there were 24 cases that were found to be self-defense, homicides in state custody (Smoot), etc. What's bothersome is the 141 open cases.

John Galt said...

The big discrepancies, however, are in the part I property and the part II categories. About 1 in 10 hits the CompStat system in my neighborhood. What I'm not really sure of is whether the un-censored count was higher or lower in 1999. It seems like it's higher, although somewhat less violent.

We still have a bunch of new bulletholes on the block this month, however.

John Galt said...

In the news, the State of Massachusetts has designated hospitals with too high a patient/nurse ratio unsafe.

I'd suggest doing the same with Baltimore neighborhoods. Using Parole & Probation case counts, construct a criminal/police officer ratio, which should be around 10 in east coast metro areas. Any neighborhood with a ratio greater than maybe 25 should be designated an emergency zone with draconian curfews and maybe martial law until the municipality sees fit to correct the imbalance.

High-prevalence areas with a ratio of 10-25 should have deployment prioritized according to incidence measures.

As a point of reference, my area has a prevalence ratio over 50.

I feel screwed, particularly when I see cops everywhere down by the Stadia, the Inner Harbor, and that goddamn convention center. Let's take care of the tourists, by all means.

InsiderOut said...

I am shocked! Maryland's top law enforcement official "[w]hen asked if police should be involved in disciplining cases of possession, he said, 'that might be a pretty big burden to put on such a young person.'"
What the f*ck?! Drug laws don't apply to juveniles now? Or it should only apply to the poor kids who go to public school? What does it mean that the police should not be involved when a crime occurs because 'there might be a pretty big burden to put on a young person.'? The burden that is too big is that the burden to obey the laws of this State? Does he advocate decriminalizing drug possession for all juveniles? I hope the Examiner follows up on this (I know, for sure, the Sun won't because he's related to O'Malley).

John Galt said...

Apropos of my other issue, any law which is too burdensome to reasonably be enforced ought to be removed from the books by a mandamus upon the legislature.

I don't believe that governments are entitled to neglect to enforce laws once passed. Jeez, don't I live in the wrong city.

node said...

Wow, that's amazing. Not enforcing a law because it might be too much of a "burden" on the youngster? So much for equal treatment under the law.

Although Galt will probably disagree vehemently, this might be a time to raise the question: if the agents of law enforcement themselves (i.e. bcpd), are hesitant to arrest and process young offenders guilty only of possession, should the laws possibly change to decriminalize possession of small amounts of narcotics?

After all, that's all Maryland's correctional system needs: more non-violent junkies.

John Galt said...

I'm not a total lunatic. Just partial.

Actually, I believe strongly in decriminalizing the possession of small quantities of lower-impact drugs, but I also believe in increasing the penalties for criminal behavior while under their influence or in their possession. Like, maybe treble. In that way, if they commit a felony, they're gone. Long minimum sentences.


Also, I'm glad you brought up the issue of inmates for nonviolent offenses. Common misconception: those convicted of nonviolent offenses are nonviolent.

Reality: given evidentiary burdens, a set of violent & nonviolent charges are frequently plea-bargained down to nonviolent charges, others nullprossed or dismissed.

The question to ask is more: How many nonviolent convicts have never been charged with violent offenses?