A 15-year-old boy who Palo Alto police believe robbed two younger boys on Edgewood Drive in March was arrested Friday afternoon, April 27.
Police believe the boy, an East Palo Alto resident who wasn't identified because he is a juvenile, was one of three youths who stole a cell phone and an electronic music player from two 13-year-old boys on March 31. The older teenagers allegedly rode up behind the two victims. Two were on BMX-style bikes while the third was on a Razor-style scooter.
Police said one of the older boys asked the 13-year-old boys for the time. He then allegedly rode back to the other two teens before returning to the 13-year-old boys and demanding that they give him their stuff.
Police said the boy demanding the stuff had his hand in his sweatshirt picket. The victims reported hearing a sound that they described as a "can of soda opening," which they thought may have been the sound of a gun cocking. The older boys then fled the scene and were last seen crossing the Newell Street Bridge into East Palo Alto.
After an investigation, police located the boy who they believe committed the robbery on El Camino Real, near Oxford Avenue at about 3 p.m. Friday. The boy was arrested for robbery and then released to a parent in accordance with department policy.
Comments
Charleston Gardens
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:07 am
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:07 am
Oooh, starter thugs. How charming! Good job PAPD.
East Palo Alto
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:18 am
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:18 am
Perhaps the parents arrest record should be a factor before release into their custody. Ya think? No respect for the law or other peoples property starts at home!
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:22 am
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:22 am
> After an investigation, police located the boy who they believe committed
> the robbery on El Camino Real, near Oxford Avenue at about 3 p.m. Friday.
This sounds like the police have managed to identify at least one of the youths responsible for this robbery, but as with all of the reports attendant to this particular robbery. But why not all three? And since this situation involves non-resident minors, the final resolution of the case will likely not be made public.
This situation, and the others, raises a troubling issue of the cost of law enforcement in general. The dollar value of the stolen cell phone and electronic music player could not be more than a couple hundred dollars, if that. The cost of this investigation, the DA’s time, Court time (if it gets to that) and long term parole oversight will no doubt run into the tens of thousands of dollars.
So—is it worth it? Is there any other way to deal with this proliferation of minor thefts, other than throw hundreds of billions of dollars of “law enforcement” at the problem. Something is clearly wrong with this picture—but it’s also clear that there are no easy solutions. We reel at the harsh punishments of barbaric religions—like Islam—that cut off the hands of thieves. We blanch at our own past, where we incarcerated, and even, executed, thieves. Harsh punishments simply are not deterrents, nor is “law” itself—since “thou shalt not steal” is clearly engrained in the basis of virtually every moral, or legal, code.
This is a most vexing problem.
Crescent Park
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:52 am
on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:52 am
The kid will be robbing homes again next week. The parents should be given heavy fines. That's the only way to put pressure on the parents to watch their kids more carefully.
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Apr 30, 2012 at 11:12 am
on Apr 30, 2012 at 11:12 am
Troubled, "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." This robbery is certainly an act of stupidity, though the stupidity itself may be, at least in part, blamed on youth.
The hope should be that the deterrent will come from these kids recognizing that what they have done is wrong and that there is a better life open to them if they knock it off. How much is it worth to save a life like that and make them productive members of our society? What is the likelyhood of success in that effort?
But never discount the fact that there will always be more kids entering the ranks of the potentially-fatally-stupid, even is we move these kids out of that mode. Don't liik for a 'final soution", look for dealing with the revolving door.
Charleston Gardens
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:04 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:04 pm
Troubled? It's a starter crime...maybe better to get to these kids before they graduate to more serious offenses, if they haven't already. Again, it's all about entitlement.
Midtown
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 pm
have the kids and parents to do community services base on value of the stolen goods/ current minimum hour wages.
Greenmeadow
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:51 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:51 pm
why is this news? There have always been bullies who rob smaller kids, it sucks, but not news.
Charleston Gardens
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:05 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:05 pm
it's news Matt, because those little horrors didn't just bully, they ROBBED. i remember when we moved to Palo Alto in 1974, from NY where we never experienced anything like this, my brother was kicked in the stomach at Rinconada Park and some teenage POS took his bike...when my sister tried to defend, he hit her too. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:21 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:21 pm
Also, in addition to the robbery, there was a hint of a gun involved, making the case far more serious than simple bullying.
And who ever said we should accept even the simple bullying? The idea that bigger kids get to pick on smaller kids with impunity makes me sick. Society needs to protect its weak from injusticies from the strong, and that includes protecting our kids from our kids. You can't just turn a blind eye and let them fight it out, that is horribly unfair to the smaller kids.
It is also why the smaller kids sometimes reach for weapons as the only way they see to terminate the abuse. We don't want that to happen either.
Palo Verde
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:44 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:44 pm
If your a minor...by law, you cannot disclose their names to the public. Well, don't assume that the other two are never going to get apprehended. It will fall into place. They can convince the young boy that the other two were caught and they snitched on him and there you go. All three. Sometimes the parents are always to blame for the kids actions but we shouldn't always role with that. These kids act one way at home and run wild outside of their homes.
East Palo Alto
on Apr 30, 2012 at 7:31 pm
on Apr 30, 2012 at 7:31 pm
Wasn't this a strong arm robbery? It wasn't someone being bullied, it was bullying thieving teens robbing younger teens.
We need to be careful how we use the term "bullying" because it's become such a hot button issue. We all know that bullies & thieves have been around for millenia. Why this story is big news if beyond me - it's unacceptable & criminal but all too common.
I remember when my brother was robbed at knife point by older neighborhood bullies when he was a kid. They were bullies who were also criminals & some of them went on to become criminals, the others were just total lame losers.
College Terrace
on May 1, 2012 at 8:24 am
on May 1, 2012 at 8:24 am
Enough writes, "EPA entitlement to Palo Alto possessions is apparently a timeless tradition."
It's a culture clash!
Duveneck/St. Francis
on May 1, 2012 at 9:07 am
on May 1, 2012 at 9:07 am
What was this juvenile EPA hold-up kid doing on Oxford Avenue in Palo Alto presumably on a bike? Isn't that in Palo Alto College Terrace ? That's a rather long way from home on foot or a bike.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 1, 2012 at 9:14 am
on May 1, 2012 at 9:14 am
How come he doesn't get juvenile detention? He is simply released to his parents? Where is the justice?
East Palo Alto
on May 1, 2012 at 6:07 pm
on May 1, 2012 at 6:07 pm
Kate, fwiw, when I was a teen I rode all over the place. I didn't ride along ECR because it's dangerous, & I wasn't robbing people, but I rode from Menlo to friends in Palo Alto, Atherton & even up to The Alamda. But of course, I wasn't a nogoodnik, so the news never knew where I cycled ;-)