New Curfew Law

[Grace O'Malley]

Thanks for clearing that up. Its much better than what my daughter heard from some kids that were there in the midst of it all.

So Ken is merely relaying what a worker INSIDE the library said happened and Beejay says her daughter heard from kids who were there and had a differing account.

What that tells me, and what I already knew, is that much of what passes for truth is, in fact, hearsay. While not discounting that an incident occurred, the details and significance can vary greatly based on your own perspective.

I'm quite sure that both parties who relayed information on what they saw and heard were honestly telling of their experience. But as any lawyer knows, ask two eyewitnesses to an accident "what happened?" and you're likely to get two very different stories.

And therein lies the problem. The story spreads and soon everyone is talking about the increase in crime; then it leads to people thinking crime is a serious problem because everyone is talking about it.

That's why, in spite of those who protest otherwise, I'd like to know if crime has REALLY increased or if we're just talking about it more. As of this point, no one can point to any concrete evidence that crime is out of control in Lakewood.

Does Lakewood report to the FBI's UCR or NIBRS?

[Kenneth Warren]

Ms. O'Malley:

I appreciate your care for facts and scrutiny of hearsay. In this instance, I tried to supply the best intelligence I available to me, especially because the question involved Lakewood Public Library. Judy Gryzbowski, my source communicated with the off-duty police officer who stepped outside and advised her of his understanding of the situation.

That's all I have right now. Again I have not seen the police report.

As we know, there are - how many - stories in the Naked City?


Kenneth Warren
Director
Lakewood Public Library

[Stephanie Toole]

[quote="Grace O'Malley"]That's why, in spite of those who protest otherwise, I'd like to know if crime has REALLY increased or if we're just talking about it more. As of this point, no one can point to any concrete evidence that crime is out of control in Lakewood.
[quote]

Who said "crime is out of control in Lakewood?"

Saying there is an increase and saying it is out of control are two very different statements.

[Kenneth Warren]

Councilman Demro:

The question of unintended consequences has been raised.

Do you have any expectations/preferences concerning how curfew violations will be handled in court?

How stiff the fines for the first timer?

How stiff for repeat offenders?

Will fines cost parents so much it becomes too expensive to stay in Lakewood?

What happens when pleas of not guilty mount, and possibly choke the court and time banks of officers?

Kenneth Warren

[Shawn Juris]

Good questions. Follow up for clarification, shouldn't the fines be a significant enough deterent so that parent of violators can't afford to allow continued violations? Wouldn't this be the motivation to have parents assist in the enforcement?
This is of course assuming that those violating the curfew aren't paying their own fines.

[Grace O'Malley]

Ya, right.

Let's jump all over those kids; those curfew violators.

Let's spend all the time effort, and money on some kids out late while REAL criminals can continue to do as they please.

As long as the police are being paid by MY tax dollars, I'd think a better use of my money would be to investigate, arrest, and prosecute the DANGEROUS criminal activity in the city.

If juveniles are engaging in criminal behavior, the police have the authority to arrest or detain at ANY time ofthe day or night. The laws are already in place.


Ken Warren

Will fines cost parents so much it becomes too expensive to stay in Lakewood?

Is that your motivation? To drive "undesirables" out of Lakewood?
Do you equate a curfew violation with robbery or selling drugs?

It should not be a crime for a 17 year old to be on the street at 11:15PM. This is America, not a third world dictatorship.

There are already laws on the books to deal with criminal activity regardless of age.

Your elitism is showing and its not pretty.

[Rick Uldricks]

deleted

[David Lay]

It should not be a crime for a 17 year old to be on the street at 11:15PM. This is America, not a third world dictatorship.

A child has no place being on the street at 11:15PM.

[Jeff Endress]

A child has no place being on the street at 11:15PM

Agreed, but is a seventeen year old High School senior a "child".

Jeff

[Jim O'Bryan]

It should not be a crime for a 17 year old to be on the street at 11:15PM. This is America, not a third world dictatorship.

A child has no place being on the street at 11:15PM.

While "Elitism" seems a little over the top. I have to agree with Grace on this version of house arrest for law abiding citizens. When we punish all for the ill deeds of a few, it does not feel like America.

Seems like one of those good ideas! That are not.

I would love to see the numbers that backed up this "change."

At what age do you have to cover legal identification?

How do we have these kids prove their ages?

Do police, that are on other nuisance calls, have to take time off from that to call parents or drive kids home to then wrote tickets.

We have called for homeowners to go to court for run down homes, and want that increased, rightfully so. The courts are filled with criminals, rightfully so, now throw on nuisance, and curfews and I begin to see a legal system very over worked.

Ken

On one hand I can see the numbers for more police mean more court cases. The math seems simple, more police more tickets. This scenario also puts a massive strain on the courts, so the a police levy would mean more money needed for court and jails. Mention jails and cost goes through the roof. Home many criminals sit in jail instead of bonding out? Maybe Jeff has numbers for this. Then the strain on probation officers, court workers, social workers. It seems like a never ending spiral.

Or

Thirty new police might send out a signal, stay out of Lakewood if you are a criminal. It reduces the burden on the courts.

.

[Joe Ott]

I agree with both Jeff AND Dave.

Go back a number of pages where I asked Demro if he plans to post the entire police dept out side the stadium and catch all the curfew breakers after games. I also asked about prom and after graduating HS and my kids will be entering college. By son, remember to be in your room by 11:00...

16 year olds can get drivers licenses (but they don't have to know how to drive them-I won't go there...). I guess we consider them responsible enough to pilot a 2 ton vehicle down the road at 60+ mph (but not be taught how to drive it, darn I said I wouldn't go there...) but not stay out at night?

I have mixed feelings about this 'look I did something' law. I agree, kids have no business being out late. At what age do you draw the line? I think the answer lies with parenting. I think that is the root cause of a lot of our societies problems...

45000 people die every year in the US due to vehicle accidents. Uhg. Must resist... not going there, not gonna do it...

I still have never rec'd a reply either by the way. I call those drive-by-posts.

[David Lay]

Thirty new police might send out a signal, stay out of Lakewood if you are a criminal. It reduces the burden on the courts.

Agreed.

[Kenneth Warren]

Ms. O'Malley:

I did not pass the curfew law.

The cost/fee questions I raised are rather obvious, when it comes to these quality of life impositions and attempts to get the attention of parents.

You ask: "Is that your motivation? To drive "undesirables" out of Lakewood?"

My motivation is a safe and orderly social norm.

If you regard me as an elitist, that's your choice.

My inquiry involved implementation and expected results - how police, courts and offenders.....

That's all.

Kenneth Warren

[Jeff Endress]

What I find quite interesting is the interplay between the two threads....this one, and the "crime in Lakewood" thread. When some of us are talking about the need for additional safety forces, there is a response of "maybe, but let's see the data".

And yet, I guess it was Okay to change the curfew without that requirement. Why is it important to examine the hard data, beyond observation and anecdote when we talk about increasing safety forces, but somehow, when we clamp down on kids and curfew, there was no need for the "data" to justify it?

I'm sure someone will say it's a matter of money....but where is the data that shows what the cost of enforcing the curfew is going to be? Seems like we have a bit of a double standard going on here.

Jeff

[Ryan Salo]

One thing I have not seen discussed here is the issue of parental permission. I believe this law allows minors to be out past the curfew with parental permission. I have not seen the entire law, but I assume that a permission slip of sorts would be required.

Remember this is not a new law, just an updated one. I think that we needed to do it to keep up with Cleveland's law change. Someone mentioned before that this is sort of like the broken tail lights law. I don't see the courthouse getting packed with people with broken tail lights, it is just an excuse to pull someone over.

Lets not go overboard on this issue, aren't there a lot more important things to discuss?