Posted on 08/19/2009 7:16:49 AM PDT by tlb
The Sacramento Police Department says that Christopher Guzman went to Garcia Bend Park on Monday night, believing that he was meeting up with a 14-year-old girl he had met on a social networking website.
"This would've been the first physical contact between the suspect and the victim," said Sacramento Police Department Sgt. Norm Leong.
As Guzman waited in his car, police say five or six of the girl's family members walked up and began attacking him and his vehicle. Guzman tried to drive away, but the family members chased him, forced him out of his car and held him for police, who arrested Guzman but did not detain the relatives.
"[Guzman] was bloody from that," Sgt. Leong said. "We'll review it and see if what they did was reasonable given the circumstances in that they were trying to detain him."
Police said that Guzman was planning to videotape the young girl in a sex act.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbs13.com ...
In the "Actions Louder Than Words Department," I think his political views, quietly expressed, were more than outweighed by his movies...
R.I.P., Chuck.
Yeah, not as many repeat offenders, I would imagine.
From the link in #51...
"The girls relatives were not arrested, but police are looking into possible charges."
obviously you haven't seen how some 14 year olds can manipulate, con, lie cheat steal, and be just generally rotten, evil little children.
Other still are already profession street girls.
I don't know where she falls in the spectrum in this case. neither do you. All I said was she isn't innocent, she had a role as well. She was willing to meet him and produce porn for money. She knew he was older.
Draw your own conclusions.
They didn’t set a trap. They didn’t take the law into their own hands. And it sounds like they called the police before they went to intercept their daughter. They believed this pervert had their daughter in his car and tried to keep him from leaving with her. They did NOTHING wrong, morally, legally, or otherwise.
Read comment #51.
In all fairness, none of that was mentioned in the article, and Joe was commenting only on what was in the article posted, long before post 51 showed up.
Oh sure - he was the goods on the silver screen. WW2 vet in real life. I agree with you - RIP Chuck!
"As Guzman waited in his car, police say five or six of the girl's family members walked up and began attacking him and his vehicle. "
Certainly this suggests some level of entrapment or ambush, and the exigent circumstances that were later alluded to by the mother were not evident in the original story. I did read the link at #51, and it reads, "The girls relatives were not arrested, but police are looking into possible charges."
Certainly, I would not begrudge any family the right to take immediate action to protect one of its own...I think it's evident from my original post that I hope none of the family members get in trouble for getting physical with this guy...that that notion seems to have been lost on so many is quite frankly a bit exasperating to me.
If indeed the family found out about their daughter's plans and went rushing to her aid after notifying the police, then certainly, there should not be any issues...if however, the family was aware of, or even set up the meeting, then went after him (having secured their daughter), then that's another story. From the accounts I've read so far, the exact circumstances are a bit cloudy at present...
The very last thing I'd want to see is a family member getting in more trouble than the scumbag who lured the daughter.
If you are being sarcastic, the rule is to use the /sarq or /sq
If you don't, then expect the repercussions
The family didn’t break the law. Please read comment #51 which includes a statement from the child’s mother.
They family didn’t lure the pervert to the park. They found out that their daughter was on her way to meet him. They called the police. Then they hurried to the park to intercept their daughter. When they got their, they believed that their daughter was in the car with this pervert. They tried to get her out of the car. The pervert attacked the father with his car. When the family realized that the daughter wasn’t in the car, they restrained the pervert until the police arrived.
This wasn’t a case of vigilante justice. This family acted as any other would to intercept their daughter from imminent bodily harm.
This pervert is very fortunate that he ran into a nice family. Many would have left his remains floating in a river.
For you younsters who think this that this type of thing never happened, it did indeed happen. I know of one incident on my father’s street during the 1930s in which man had molested a young neighborhood girl. He heard a knock at his door at about 4 AM, came downstairs and as he opened the door, five guys grabbed him, took him out to the curb and beat him nearly to death. A phone call was made to the cops and they picked him up and took him to the hospital.
He moved several months later. I would suggest that he never did that again. It was an extremely severe beatdown.
Cops knew who did it but filed no charges.
You can bet that if she did, that is a game changer in this case, and his lawyer will then have a field day with this girls family.
You can bet every word she typed to him on that adult web site will be scrutinized. It was a social networking web site, which on I don't know. many of them make you click on a disclaimer saying you have to be 18 years old to use it.
None of that means the family did anything wrong from their point of view, but it sure could from his and his lawyers.
We'll just have to wait and see to be certain.
Except I wasn't being sarcastic; I would sincerely hope that any prosecutor reviewing any charges brought against the family would accidentally misplace the file.
The fact that you don’t want to see the family get into trouble was not lost on me. (I can’t speak for others.) My issue with you was always and remains that you claim the family acted illegally by taking the law into their own hands.
That’s the only issue I have with your original post. If after reading the mother’s statement, you are willing to say that you’re no longer absolutely certain they broke the law, then I no longer have an issue with your comments.
(I always understood that you were being facetious about the prosecutor losing the file.)
yep. I predicted you would have trouble with that post when I read it. Many people have reading comprehension problems. Don't know if it is due to faulty education or just simple bone headedness. Your post was perfectly clear to anyone who bothered to read all of it, but I knew some would only read the first sentence and jump to conclusions.
Clear cut case of self defense. In all civilized states, the law is specific that self defense applies to defending yourself or your family, or those around you from perceived threats. Case dismissed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.