Decatur Police just sent out this update…
On 3/26/15, Sgt. Jackson was conducting a location check at the Decatur Library due to several motor vehicle thefts in the area and observed three young males loitering in the area. Sgt. Jackson observed one of the males looking at vehicles in the parking deck while the other two stood near the entrance/exit. Upon seeing Sgt. Jackson’s vehicle the three males quickly walked from their positions and entered the rear door of the Decatur Library.
Officers located the three males inside of the library. One of the males had active warrants for armed robbery and criminal attempt to commit theft of a motor vehicle for the 3/4/15 incident that occurred in the parking lot at Commerce Drive and Church Street in Decatur. One of the males had an active juvenile runaway petition out of Clayton County. Further investigation revealed the three males came to the library with the intention of stealing a vehicle.
[An] 18-year-old [from] DeKalb County, was arrested and charged with loitering or prowling in addition to being served with the active warrants for armed robbery and criminal attempt to commit theft of a motor vehicle. [A] 17-year-old [from] DeKalb County, was arrested and charged with loitering or prowling and possession of tools for the commission of a crime. The 15-year-old juvenile was charged with loitering or prowling.
Book ’em!
Well done DPD.
+1 Great Job DPD! It is this kind of active responsive policing that will spread the word, it is not worth committing a crime in Decatur because you’ll get caught quickly and face hard time.
Thank you DPD
audacity
I hope they spend some quality time in Jail.
Great job! Send a message…Decatur is not the place to commit a crime.
It always amazes me how much crime happens at the library. And the one time I caught a Decatur kid playing hookey, it was at the library. I know it’s near MARTA and there’s a huge parking deck but it’s also bordered by a church, the fire station, and Decatur Rec. Does not compute for me.
Yeaaaa, Decatur Police! You’ve done it again. Thank you!
My car was stolen in January from the parking lot on Commerce (Decatur 1st UMC parking lot) across from the cemetery and mini-Kroger in the middle of the day while I was working (doors locked, nothing in the car). A week or so later, in that same parking lot, I overheard a couple calling the police to report a stolen 97 Honda. I was told that the car thieves look for older cars which are easier to steal. Mine was a Jeep Cherokee. Later found in NW Atlanta all messed up.
We had an old Honda stolen from the high school parking lot at 11:30 am one day last week (on video). (Recovered across the street the next day with both body and mechanical damage.) Wonder if it was these same folks.
I’d bet on it.
Nice job Decatur Police!
I hope all will recognize that proactive policing works. Suppose these kids were doing the same thing but that one had a good reason for looking at cars and the others were just waiting for him. If the police had detained and questioned but warrants were not outstanding and no intent to steal confirmed, the police should not get a polar opposite judgment. Many today suggest that “loitering” stops are just a pre-text for race-based profiling. If you believe that, then you have to accept the consequence that it could dissuade the police from making stops like this that result in getting bad people off the street. Obviously, these guys were coming back to Decatur to commit further crimes, and any one of us could have been a victim next time. If a cop exercises good faith judgment, he or she should not be labeled a hero or racist based on whether an arrest results.
Police have a tough job, and there are shades of grey and instinct and judgment involved. I’m glad the police were right. If they are wrong next time, I will still support them.
The police will tell you how many times small things lead to big things. That’s why they stop folks for sometimes apparently minor traffic violations.
It’s not clear to me that this is an instance of “proactive” policing in the modern sense. I read the description as saying the officer stopped the kids for more than mere loitering, but for reasonable suspicion — i.e., 2 kids watching the exit, one looking at multiple cars, and then all three “quickly” moving position at the sight of an officer. Even a civil libertarian like me has no issue with a stop in that instance, as there are sufficient grounds for reasonable suspicion. I would say this is an instance of the effectiveness of traditional, careful policing, not the NYC style “broken windows” proactive citizen harassment.
Yes, of course, the wider a police dragnet, the more likely it is they will sweep up a criminal or two. That, in and of itself, doesn’t justify detaining people without reasonable suspicion of a crime. More generally, because “proactive” policing carries great potential for abuse, and because it brushes up against a core freedom against unreasonable search and seizure, it should be used very sparingly, if at all.
+1.
+2
I’d say it’s better to be safe than sorry. I’m glad the police are proactive. If one has done nothing wrong then there’s nothing to worry about is there?
“If one has done nothing wrong then there’s nothing to worry about is there?”
Seriously?
I know one co-worker that will be very happy to hear that you caught those three guys!! I wonder if any of them match the description of the office prowler that we had, just a week before the incident in our parking lot?