Monday, February 18, 2008

Party crashers

Last November, I blogged about some of the hazards that arise from large, open-invitation drinking parties. In Not all harmless fun I described a couple of "party invasion" robberies that had occurred in the North Bottoms neighborhood on the preceding weekend.

Well, they're back. Sunday morning, I was reading overnight reports waiting for the newspaper to arrive, when I encountered the Incident Reports on three robberies in the 1100 block of Claremont Street, just after midnight. Apparently, the victims, leaving a party were confronted by a group of assailants cruising the neighborhood just for the purpose of committing such crimes. The victims were jumped, and lost cash, credit card, wallet, cell phone and (of course) the 12-pack they were toting to their next stop.

My guess would be that at least some of the suspects were also involved in the November cases in the same neighborhood. Party crashers seem to be coming in two types: "invaders," who are looking to forcibly rob and assault the inebriated and meek; and "slinkers," who will secretly look around, lift a purse or two, and maybe case the place for a later burglary. We've had our share of both, and made a few arrests in such cases.

It appears that this is a growing risk of hosting a rent party, or something that looks like one to the gang on the prowl for tipsy victims who are accustomed to a little high school chest-bumping, but not to real violence. With spring on the horizon, and Phase II of the high-risk drinking party scene about to unfold, this is worth keeping in mind.

We are not alone. A Google search and a click on the News link revealed quite a few recent news articles from far-flung media sources. This phenomenon of violent party invasion is occurring in many other locations, and the story is often quite similar to our own local cases.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Administer coffee before typing! The robberies were on 1100 Claremont, vandalisms 900 Charleston, and don't forget the rash of assaults at 14th & O (which could be related to the Claremont robberies, but the Magic 8-ball is unsure on that). An interesting thing about that 1100 block of Claremont is that the majority of the houses are actually owner-occupied. One rental is owned by a resident that lives on the same block, a couple are owned by landlords that live in Lincoln, and one is owned by a landlord that lives in another town. My money is on that out-of-town-owned house as being the main problem on that street. All other factors being equal, an absentee landlord's tenants are more likely to cause problems for neighbors and, of course, trouble for law enforcement.

I'm not sure if these absentee landlord homes get bought right off as investment properties, or if they get bought as housing for the kids while they attend UNL (it beats pouring money down a dorm rathole - if you've got good kids that is), then morph into rentals later, after the brood has passed through their post-sec years. I'm sure it's a little of both, but the important thing is to remain involved in your investment, so that you won't risk going to County for 6 months because you maintained a disorderly house. Run the background checks and credit checks, and make the tenancy applicants pay for them. Don't drop a turd among a bunch of responsible homeowners, because it'll stink up the whole neighborhood.

Tom Casady said...

Yes, Claremont, thanks. Coffee adequate, just jumping back and forth from page to page with North Bottoms on mind. Also the Claremont case is probably related to A8-014589 on Indigo Rd. around 2:40 a.m., and quite possibly A8-014528 in 2700 block of P Street at 12:11 a.m..

We really need to catch these guys.

The 14th & O cases are unrelated--just the usual mayhem at bar break. Your Magic 8 ball is pretty good, but you shoud go with the updated Magic 9 ball. Don't want to be stuck in the '70's, you know.

Anonymous said...

On the robberies, how is it decided which cases will have a Crimestoppers reward offered? There have to be a couple of dozen people who know some or all of these semi-serial robbers, most of them thugs, and one thing about thugs, they'll often sell their best buddy for a relatively paltry sum.

Anonymous said...

I would never suggest that robberies or burglaries were deserved by the victims for being stupid. However, neither do I have much sympathy for them in cases such as these. Stay home and have your own party with a few familiar guests, or go to a small party where you know everyone if you have any desire to be safe from these kinds of acts. Another option might be to stay sober enough that you have some idea what is going on around you.

Anonymous said...

slinkers.....
NO SUCH WORD IN WEBSTERS

Tom Casady said...

Anonymous 3:51-

Your point? Sometimes you just have to invent a new word. Police officers do a lot of that.

Slinker: n. 1. one who slinks; 2. a stealthy person.
from the verb slink.

Anonymous said...

I have some other words I'd use to describe such predatory and larcenous individuals, but none you'd probably want posted here!

wwod said...

...and if they slink up and down steps, aren't they slinkys?

Tom Casady said...

wwod:

Abso lutely!

Anonymous said...

I'd like to push them down the stairs.