Vigil held for slain teen

Southtown Chicago ^ | Dec 29, 2013 | Mike Nolan

[KeyLargo]

Vigil held for slain teen

By Mike Nolan mnolan@southtownstar.com December 28, 2013 11:22PM

Updated: December 29, 2013 2:17AM

Family and friends of a slain pregnant teenager, whose baby doctors were able to save, held a candlelight vigil Saturday in her memory.

The aunt of 17-year-old Eva Casara said at the vigil in Dolton — held where the teen was found on Christmas Day, shot in the head and left between two apartment buildings — that her niece’s baby, Laylani, is “doing much better.”

“She’s a true fighter,” Jennifer Ross said of the baby, who weighed just over a pound when delivered.

[KeyLargo]

"http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/csp/cms/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=eIVppCyaY3LO__0CBfLf9s$daE2N3K4ZzOUsqbU5sYtEUqPWTsKoWnuff3CR2veL6FB40xiOfUoExWL3M40tfzssyZqpeG_J0TFo7ZhRaDiHC9oxmioMlYVJD0A$3RbIiibgT65kY_CSDiCiUzvHvODrHApbd6ry6YGl5GGOZrs-&CONTENTTYPE=image/jpeg"

[yldstrk]

look for the baby’s dad who is livid that this baby wasn’t aborted because he doesn’t want to pay child support, you will likely find the killer

[KeyLargo]

And now the REAL story that you won't see in MSM about the so called 'victim'.

(CBS) – A pregnant teen fatally shot on Christmas and dumped in Dolton played a role in her own death, authorities said Sunday as the girl’s boyfriend and older brother were ordered held without bond on murder charges.

CBS 2’s Courtney Gousman reports.

Anthony Lee, 16, and his brother, 21-year-old Diante Coakley, made court appearances Sunday as prosecutors unveiled details about Eva Casara’s final hours.

They say Casara, 17, helped plan an armed robbery by arranging a meeting with the intended target of Lee, Coakley and a third brother who has not yet been charged.

When the intended victim arrived by car at 152nd and Dorchester, the pregnant Casara and Coakley jumped into the backseat, according to prosecutors. Violence erupted when the driver ordered Coakley out of the vehicle.

“Coakley exited the car and walked to the driver’s side door, trying to open it when the driver began to drive away,” according to a proffer of evidence offered in court. “Defendant Coakley and one of the other offenders began shooting at the car with (Casara) still in the backseat.”

Casara was shot in the back of the head. When the driver and a passenger discovered she was still in the car and injured, they dumped her in the 1100 block of East 152nd Street, authorities say.

Via: http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/12/29/bail-denied-for-teen-his-brother-in-pregnant-girls-shooting-death/

[Red in Blue PA]

In my mind, the USA is now at 3rd world status because of these ferals which do not allow people to freely walk the streets.

(yet nobody can openly talk like that because doing so would be “racist”)

[sr4402]

A usually fact bereft article. Another tells the WHOLE STORY:

Authorities say it happened after Lee, Coakley, their brother and Casara left the home of the brothers' grandmother and went to 152nd and Dorchester in the south suburb, where they planned to rob someone Casara arranged to meet.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=9375078

So she helped with a robbery and they want a vigil for her? They must want more robberies.

Glad the baby was saved.

[yldstrk]

uh huh

bee ess

the plan all along was to kill her so the baby daddy wouldn’t have to pay child support

look for the “target” to have been in on the “plan”

[Tupelo]

I have noticed that the Africanmerican community is terrific at holing “vigils” for murder victims. but not so terrific at stopping the killings. When interviewed by the POlice, the most common sentence seems to be, “I ain't seed nuthin.”
Snitching is a worse offense in that community than the killing.

[Utilizer]

Related: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3106520/posts

[yldstrk]

the baby was saved, the plan didn’t work out too well, and the depraved “baby daddy” will still have to pay child support. Once he is out of prison.

[Daveinyork]

They hold vigils, demand that something be done, and then vote for politicians who will continue to do nothing, or scream racism if an attempt is made to do something.

[MrB]

I hadn’t heard that there was a high incidence of “baby daddies” paying any sort of child support.

[Navy Patriot]

We can make lemonade out of this by parting out Coakley, Lee, and the third brother (none of which have the same last name, I’ll bet), for their use able organs, which would exclude their brains, surely.

[yldstrk]

oh yeah, there is an administrative procedure mandated by the fed gov that is deadly efficient at setting up the child support and racking up the “arearages” plus interest. Many will try to escape but states even send planes and marshals to fly these baby daddies back to be prosecuted for criminal non-support if the “arrearage” is more than 10K, revoke their driver’s license or other professional license whether it be nursing, physician, attorney, CDL, you name it. No appeal and nothing much an attorney can do to stop it.

Administrative law is the doom of all of us.

[sr4402]

the depraved “baby daddy” will still have to pay child support. Once he is out of prison.

Yes and have to explain why his mother is dead.

DOH!

[Standing Wolf]

It was whitey’s fault.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

The British, at least, will publish the pictures of those involved.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2530638/Boyfriend-pregnant-teenager-shot-dead-Christmas-Day-charged-murder.html

[Gumdrop]

“Bee ess

the plan all along was to kill her so the baby daddy wouldn’t have to pay child support

look for the “target” to have been in on the “plan”””

I agree. This story sounds like a cover for the real intention, which was to get rid of the girl and her baby.

[KeyLargo]

And I am certain that the deceased ‘victim’ will be added to the bogus numbers of so-called child gun death statistics that we all know are in fact a lie.

NBC Touts Study Showing Gun-Related Fatalities in Children is On the Rise, Forgets to Fact-Check
By Nick Leghorn on October 30, 2013

Shannon Watts (front right) (courtesy

Ever since the school shooting in Newtown, one of the preferred tactics for gun control advocates has been to argue that guns kill lots of children every year. It’s one hell of a propaganda claim, since there’s nothing quite like the bodies of dead children to empower the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex, override the analytical abilities of the voting public and try to sneak through a little gun control legislation. We’ve seen this tactic before from the New York Times and we thoroughly debunked it. Now it looks like a medical student and his advisor have taken it upon themselves to pick up the mantle and try to advance the party line a little further. And once again, they’ve used some remarkably flawed data to back up their efforts . . .

To be fair, it was actually Discovery that first tipped me off to this steaming turd of a study, but NBC News will get no less of my ire for actually running with it.

The study was conducted by a Boston medical student and his adviser at Harvard. They ostensibly investigated the death rate of “children” at hospitals from gunshot wounds. Right away we run into a problem, because like the New York Times article the medical student in question includes all patients under the age of 20 in his definition of “children.”

The reason the word “children” is so loaded is that it evokes images of innocent, cherub-faced little tots barely old enough for elementary school. The picture that the title of the article and that the study tries to paint is one of innocent little Suzie being shot and dying before her 10th birthday. But in reality, as I discussed in the Times takedown, the vast and overwhelming majority of deaths from firearms for this age range happens in those 15 and over.

Personally, my cut-off for calling someone a child is where the state believes that they’re capable of operating a deadly machine at high speeds on the public roadways: 16. Any reasonable person might expand that definition to, at most, 18. But the study included, ahem, “children” up to the age of 20 because the probability of being wounded or killed by a gun increases drastically for every year between the ages of 15 and 20. The numbers simply weren’t big enough using actual children, so the study’s authors padded their numbers with those cohorts most associated with gang membership.

OK, so the stats are plainly padded. But before we actually get to the numbers, where do these authors get their statistics? From the NBC article:

Madenci, and his colleague, Dr. Christopher Weldon, a surgeon at Boston Children’s Hospital, tallied the new statistics by culling a national database of 36 million pediatric hospitalizations from 1997 to 2009, the most recent year for which figures are available.

Wait. So, what they were looking at were the numbers of pediatric patients hospitalized for gunshot wounds? That would exclude anyone who A) was admitted to a non-pediatric service, B) was killed at the scene and never transported to the hospital, or C) was treated at a hospital that didn’t report in to the database. That’s like trying to get water out of a well using a sieve.

OK, so the data set includes an abnormally large swath of the population and uses a terribly flawed database for its input. What were the results?

During that period, hospitalizations of kids and teens aged 20 and younger from gunshot wounds jumped from 4,270 to 7,730. Firearm deaths of children logged by hospitals rose from 317 in 1997 to 503 in 2009, records showed.

That doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. The authors claim that nationwide, the trend for “children” dying from firearm related causes is on the rise, but I just ran the numbers from the CDC, and they paint a different story.

For actual “children” (12 and under), the following stats were recorded:

1997: 318 fatalities
2009: 209 fatalities

For “children” between 13 and 19, here’s what the CDC said was going on:

1997: 3,905 fatalities
2009: 2,502 fatalities

Two things pop out immediately. First, the study conducted by the med student and his mentor missed a couple thousand fatalities. Second, their conclusions were completely bogus.

If the study and NBC News are to be believed, the number of children dying from gunshot wounds is on the rise. But if we look at an actually unbiased source (the CDC, who collect all death-related statistics in the United States), the number of deaths from firearms is declining.

What’s even more astounding is that the raw number going down, not just the rate. With the increase in population we might expect that the raw number of children killed by guns to rise in proportion to the population, but the rate to remain the same or drop slightly. In this case, both the raw number AND the rate are declining. And yet NBC News and Discovery are both reporting that these numbers are on the rise.

The issue here is really the source of the data. If the authors wanted to know the truth about whether increased gun ownership is increasing the risk of fatal incidents involving firearms, the CDC’s numbers are there and readily available — he didn’t need to go trudging through an incomplete and obscure database for statistics. But rather than look at the whole picture, they decided to restrict their input to deaths in hospitals.

As an EMT, I can tell you that we don’t typically transport corpses to the hospital emergency room — they go straight to the morgue. Those instances aren’t counted in the study. Similarly, not all injuries are serious enough for a $400+ ambulance ride and $1,000 hospital bill. Those instances aren’t in the study either. And including both those instances, you start to clearly see the downward – not upward – trend in “children” and firearms related deaths.

In the Discovery version of the article, the author of the study officially loses all credibility as far as statistical analytical ability is concerned.

“Based on our research, we know that there is a clear correlation between household gun ownership (and gun safety practices) and childhood gunshot wounds in the home on a large scale,” Madenci said in an email to Discovery News. [...] He said he decided to look at the question of gun ownership and childhood gun deaths after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.

If the author were to say that the overall accident rate for children in houses with guns had increased, that would be an interesting finding. But he didn’t — he wrote that gun accidents happen more when guns are present. That’s like saying households with cars are more likely to have a family member die in a car accident. What would be a persuasive argument to me is if the author proved that having a gun in the home increases the overall death rate (including all methods of death), because that would indicate that guns increase the overall probability of death. But he didn’t.

All he did was point out that by owning a certain object you’re more likely to be killed by that object that means nothing. Unless he’s trying to get some free publicity to help in his search for an intern position at a hospital in the near future, that is.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/foghorn/nbc-falls-flawed-study-firearms-related-deaths-children-hook-line-sinker/

In the January 2014 issue of America’s First Freedom NRA magazine NRA members can read author Marshall Lewin addressing the issue of the gun banners lies about child gun deaths.

JUNK SCIENCE
MEDICINE
“To justify a prescription for gun control, two doctors claim a secret study reveals rising gun deaths among America’s children. But a closer look at their methodology and motivation reveals the worm in their bottle.”

http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/first-freedom/

[KeyLargo]

"The British, at least, will publish the pictures of those involved."

Anthony Lee, 16, left; Diante Coakley, 21 (Dolton Police Dept.)CBS Chicago

[Valpal1]

Chronically unemployed teen age baby daddies don’t pay child support. That’s for whitey.