Afternoon read: Crime in the Times

Crime scene tape. Photo: Tex Texin CC some rights reserved

Hello, and happy Monday!

In my perusal of our local papers, I often come across crime stories, and for whatever reason, I notice the greatest number of these in the Watertown Daily Times. Today’s Afternoon Read is a roundup of some of today’s crime writeups. No names have been changed to protect the innocent (at least not by me), although I’m not printing people’s names here as the Times does.

Here goes, in no particular order:

An Evans Mills man is accused of choking his wife “during a dispute.” The man has been charged with second-degree harassment and “criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation.” Police say he also pushed and punched his wife during the “dispute.”

In Massena, a Potsdam woman is charged with aggravated harassment after she allegedly called her ex-boyfriend 41 times in an hour, and subsequently drove to his house, shouted and banged on the door.

An Albany woman is being held on drug charges at Cape Vincent Correctional Facility: The woman seems to have been doing all sorts of (somewhat unclear thanks to legal lingo) things with drugs, such as “first degree introduction of dangerous contraband”, “seventh-degree criminal possession of a controlled substance”, and unlawful possession of marijuana. Apparently she was found with some Oxycodone tablets and marijuana in her pocket while visiting the prison this weekend.

A Watertown Man is charged with second-degree criminal mischief (that’s a felony) after police say he punched out two windows and caused $2,000 in damage early Sunday morning on Main Street.

A Watertown cab driver has been charged with providing alcohol to an underaged man (he was 20 and is identified as “of Fort Drum,” so presumably he’s a servicemember). It’s interesting, that intersection of legal drinking age and legal age to be in the military.

Check forging! A Watertown woman has been charged with fourth-degree grand larceny and three counts of second-degree forgery after fake-signing three checks with someone else’s name on them. The total amount of the forgery was $1,300.

An 18-year-old Lacona man is charged with second-degree criminal trespass after entering an apartment in Sandy Creek without permission.

OK, here’s the one that really got me: Two South Jefferson Central School students, 15 and 13, are facing charges after allegedly having sexual intercourse at school. They are both charged with sexual misconduct and endangering the welfare of a child. I was very unclear on how this constitutes a crime, so I looked it up. Here’s the law (this is a misdemeanor, by the way.) It seems the most relevant part is the first one (emphasis mine.)

A person is guilty of endangering the welfare of a child when:
    1.  He or she knowingly acts in a manner likely to be injurious to the
  physical, mental or moral welfare of a child less than  seventeen  years
  old  or  directs  or  authorizes  such  child to engage in an occupation
  involving a substantial risk of danger to his or her life or health; or
    2. Being a parent, guardian or other person legally charged  with  the
  care or custody of a child less than eighteen years old, he or she fails
  or refuses to exercise reasonable diligence in the control of such child
  to  prevent  him  or  her  from becoming an "abused child," a "neglected
  child," a "juvenile delinquent" or a "person in need of supervision," as
  those terms are defined in articles ten, three and seven of  the  family
  court act.
    3. A person is not guilty of the provisions of this section when he or
  she  engages  in  the  conduct  described  in subdivision one of section
  260.00 of this article: (a) with the intent to wholly abandon the  child
  by relinquishing responsibility for and right to the care and custody of
  such  child;  (b)  with  the intent that the child be safe from physical
  injury and cared for in an appropriate manner; (c)  the  child  is  left
  with an appropriate person, or in a suitable location and the person who
  leaves  the child promptly notifies an appropriate person of the child's
  location; and (d) the child is not more than thirty days old.

Also, a former Walmart Supercenter employee is accused of falsifying return slips to the tune of more then $2,000; a Watertown woman is charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest (by walking in the street and laying on the ground, respectively);  a Brasher Falls woman is charged with stealing $15 in gas; A Gouverneur teen (17) is charged with possessing a stolen cell phone; a Calcium man is charged with issuing a bad check to his vet’s office.

I think that’s it. Rough weekend. And hey, be careful out there.



Tags: , ,

6 Comments on “Afternoon read: Crime in the Times”

Leave a Comment
  1. tourpro says:

    If the local paper down here (P’Burgh) did the same thing with the police blotter, then it would read very similarly.

  2. Pete Klein says:

    Yes, “Two South Jefferson Central School students, 15 and 13, are facing charges after allegedly having sexual intercourse at school” is strange because, I presume, it was consensual.

  3. tootightmike says:

    I wonder if that was illegal when I was a teen….

  4. Two Cents says:

    the new chocking control laws that regulate the number of fingers used, down to seven from ten should curtail future domestic violence…..

    {sarcasm, paul :) }

  5. Paul says:

    How do you call someone 41 times in one hour? That is pretty impressive.

    Sounds like she is playing hard to get!

  6. Marlo Stanfield says:

    Having sex with someone under 17 can be charged as a misdemeanor crime in New York even if both parties are underaged and relatively close in age. If you’re under 17, you’re legally incapable of consent. If the age difference is enough, it’s a felony. The kids in that article are being charged with sexual misconduct, which is a misdemeanor; one of the definitions of it under the law is having sex with someone who’s incapable of consent.

    The link for the article isn’t working, so I can’t read the circumstances of it, but I think it’s pretty ridiculous to charge a 13 and 15-year-old with a sex offense if it was consensual. It almost seems like an abuse of the legal process, to call the cops on two teenagers having consensual sex and charge them with a crime.

Leave a Reply