facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Youngstown police: Youth must be off the streets by curfew



Published: Fri, February 3, 2012 @ 12:07 a.m.

Foley cites parents’ role in city ordinance

photo

Foley

By John W. Goodwin Jr.

jgoodwin@vindy.com

YOUNGSTOWN

Carlos Crues Jr. was gunned down at an East Side party that went on until at least 2 a.m.

There were several other teens attending the party, and city officials say this as well as similar acts of trouble with young people can be avoided if parents would make their juvenile children observe the city’s curfew for minors.

Police have made no arrest in the 17-year-old teen’s slaying, the third this month, so it is unclear if those responsible are also underage. But at least one of the females walking with Crues at the time of the shooting also was a minor, police added.

Police say unsupervised minors out past 11 p.m. can lead to trouble and is against a long-standing city ordinance.

The city ordinance dealing with curfew for minors says: “No child of 17 years and under shall be upon or about the city streets and sidewalks between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. of the following morning, unless accompanied by his parent or guardian.”

The language is easy enough to understand, yet Police Chief Rod Foley said officers often are writing tickets to juveniles out past curfew and transporting them to their homes.

The ordinance also places weight on the shoulders of parents, stating that no parent is permitted to allow their minor child out past 11 p.m. without supervision. Violation of the ordinance is minor misdemeanor, punishable by a fine.

Foley said officers will stop and ask for identification when they suspect an individual is younger than 18. The minor is taken into custody and then delivered to his or her parents with a ticket for the curfew violation.

Foley said manpower is a problem in enforcing the curfew more stringently.

“We do enforce it, not as much as I would like to, but we keep up on it as much as possible,” he said. “This is always on our radar screen, but it’s been sporadic because we don’t have the manpower to do it all the time.”

Foley said he is requesting the hiring of additional officers, which will give the department leeway to aggressively handle matters such as curfew violations more consistently.

Ultimately, Foley said it is the parents’ responsibility to make sure their children adhere to the law and are supervised or home during restricted hours.

“These parents do not think it is a big deal, so we try to cite the parents at the same time to make them responsible for these kids,” he said.

Parents, Foley said, often will tell police their child was thought to be spending the night elsewhere and had no permission to be on the streets past curfew. Parents cited for the violation, regardless of the number of times cited, face a minor misdemeanor.

The juvenile court also attempts to make parents the responsible party in keeping wayward youths indoors after curfew, but there are potential penalties imposed on juveniles who break the law.

Annie Booth, assistant to the court administrator at the Martin P. Joyce Juvenile Justice Center, said there is a list of potential penalties for not obeying curfew.

“We meet for an intake conference, and they may receive community service or detention,” she said. “We might refer them to counseling or other things. There are endless possibilities with curfew violations.”

Anthony D’Apolito, court administrator at the justice center, said curfew violations are considered “status offenses,” meaning they are crimes that apply to juveniles but not adults. Those crimes, he said, cannot be punished by more than one day of detention.

D’Apolito, like Foley, said the ultimate objective is to make parents responsible for their own children.

“The goal here is to empower the parents and let them handle the problem. Then we check to make sure they are handling the problem or that they can or are willing to handle the problem,” he added.


Comments

1TERRI_USA(30 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

Anyone else knows what happen to Freeastlast Stan.

I know he would definitely mention the subculture in this artle, he makes me laugh so much he is definitely missed!

The police better have unmarked police crusers ir the youngster will run and/or hide when they see the police cruser.

Suggest removal:

2r0n724(62 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

Hopefully Stan dropped off of the face of the earth.. otherwise he would be complaining that this curfew is in violation of kids rights while they are out exploring their surroundings.

Anyway.. I say this curfew is bull ! I agree with the idea,..but...you know as well as I do that neither kids or parents will take this seriously. The same thug wannbes will be on the street night after night. The only change will be that they will get better at hiding from the police. Instead of a fine.. lock them up for 14 - 30 days for the 1st offense and longer terms for each subsequent offense. Dont give me crap about jail over crowding...stack the morons 3 high if u have to. Then send them out daily to clean up the streets and interstates with armed guards with them. It works in Florida...they brought back the chain gangs shortly before I was transfered to this place. You will end up making your point!

Get a clue youngstown!!

Suggest removal:

3Charles42705(15 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

Hmm sound like someone was reading my comments months ago about curfews. Ok how about the gang injunctions? And what do you mean "We try to cite the parents" When you drop the kid off at home you cite them and give them a court date. If they don't show they now have a warrant....Stop sugar coating it.

Suggest removal:

4foxyglo(372 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

A shame that a curfew have to be made for children. That should start at home, it is not always that a parent is at work and their young sneak out of the house. If you are a good parent your child would be in at a decent time. People dont have control over their children, you are what you eat.A child under age out after ten o'clock does not make sense.they should give the parent jail time and see how many children are out on the street after that.These woman just dropping babies like flies and when they turn five they are in the street, raising themselves. I see it too often. A child five yrs. of age should not even be allowed off their street. I see them all the time.Then you say he had no enemies, everyone like them, well if at home you would not have to try and figure this out. WAKE THE HELL UP

Suggest removal:

5whitesabbath(738 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

Hell with giving them a ride home, use transport buses , put 1 on each side of town, make the little bastards sit on the bus until 5:00 in the morning then transport them to Juvenile hall, then give the parents a ticket when the PARENTS pick them up, if the PARENTS dont come, charge them by the day, and cut off any assistance they have.

Suggest removal:

6Lifes2Short(3877 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

"“These parents do not think it is a big deal, so we try to cite the parents at the same time to make them responsible for these kids,” he said."

And they should cite them time and time again and after the 3rd time, throw there lazy a@#es in jail. Irresponsible parents and their little wanna be gangstas.

Suggest removal:

7NoBS(1959 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

If we keep giving free money to these people without reservation and without qualification, why are we surprised when they then refuse to accept any responsibility whatever for their actions or inactions? If they don't comply with the law, they don't get their free money, Period.

Suggest removal:

8Superstar7(122 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

“The goal here is to empower the parents and let them handle the problem."
These are the same "parents" that do NOT control their failures during the school years. They wil NOT control them at night unless & until they have a financial penalty. They stop speeding when they are forced to pay a $100.-$200. fine. FINE THESE URBAN DWELLERS for the cost to the city & county to babysit their delinquents & criminals. Until a significant financial penalty is imposed, the police being a taxi service for the bastards will be ineffective, costly & a waste of manpower.

Suggest removal:

9kensgirl(617 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

All good solutions but realistically it ain't gonna happen. The reason - too many bleeding heart liberals who make one excuse after the other for the parents and the kids. I say get rid of the liberals first then go back to the old days of the strap - oh yea, then it's child abuse. Take away the welfare and they'll straighten up fast enough. And as for the teenagers walking in the streets just use the mace or tasers. They'll get off fast enough.

Suggest removal:

10jgm820(115 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

What ever happened to orphanages. They weren't always for children without parents - they were also for children whose parents were unable to care for them and/or keep them safe.

I have to say, if I ever became that type of parent, I would pray someone would step in and take my children.

Suggest removal:

11FifthAve(168 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

So now the cops will waste their time on the job going after teens, which admitedly is safer than going after CRIMINALS!

Suggest removal:

12DwightK(1263 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

I like Foley's and Sammarone's approach. It may not sound tough enough but this concentration on quality of life issues like litter and curfew might make an impact. Investigating little crimes leads to big arrests because criminals think they can get away with the little stuff. If they find out they'll be harrassed for minor transgressions maybe they'll leave the city.

Suggest removal:

13pgurney(281 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

I really do hope this works.

Suggest removal:

14Charles42705(15 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

Out here in California we have what they call "Gang Injunctions" and they work well because they are court-issued restraining order prohibiting gang members from participating in certain activities. It is based on the legal theory that gang activity constitutes a public nuisance that prevents non-gang members from enjoying peace in their communities. And the Supreme Court of California upheld the constitutionality. But there is a lot of work that need to take place in Youngstown from tearing down those old abandon houses that harbor illegal activities, fining slumlords and making parents responsible for there kids and not looking at them as welfare check.

Suggest removal:

15Lifes2Short(3877 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

5th

"So now the cops will waste their time on the job going after teens, which admitedly is safer than going after CRIMINALS!"

Of all the homicides last year and so far this year, how many involved teens? More then 80%. And not even counting the robberies, shootings, gang violence, etc. These little wanna b gangstas are the new threat to innocent citizens and the police. And I have a feeling it's only going to get worse until something is done with these young little punks! Their so useless to society, a cage or coffin is the only thing that will stop them.

Suggest removal:

16AWGSouthside(9 comments)posted 2 years, 8 months ago

Take their picture,mail them a ticket.Girard might have some cameras they're not using anymore.We could get them cheap.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport