California – What was first thought to be a horrible hit and run crash is now being treated as a triple homicide in Temescal Valley, California.
Police recently arrested a man who allegedly rammed his car into a vehicle that had six teenagers inside, resulting in three of their deaths. However, authorities are having difficulty establishing what might have motivated such a disturbing act, according the the Post.
42-year-old Anurag Chandra, from Corona, California, was arrested this past Sunday after allegedly intentionally crashing straight into a Toyota Prius. Authorities had located the white Infiniti sedan, toting front-end damage, believed to be involved in the fatal crash parked on Mojeska Summit Road on the evening of the wreck.
The call regarding the crash initially came in at around 10:23 p.m. on Sunday, where police had found the Prius that had struck a tree at Temescal Canyon Road and Trilogy Parkway.
California Highway Patrol Lieutenant David Yokley spoke with the press on Monday regarding the tragedy that unfolded over the weekend.
“It was an intentional act. Our investigation led us to believe Mr. Chandra intentionally rammed the Prius, causing the driver to lose control. The investigation has now changed from a hit-run collision to homicide.”
The Riverside County Coroner’s Bureau listed the victims that passed away as 16-year-old Daniel Hawkins and Drake Ruiz from Corona and 16-year-old Jacob Ivascu from Riverside. Friends and family of the deceased gathered Monday night to pay respect at a community prayer held at the Northpoint Evangelical Free Church based in Corona.
Individuals who had witnessed the crash play out helped police in locating Chandra. Juan Quintero, a spokesperson for the California Highway Patrol, said witnesses described the vehicle to responding authorities and another witness had followed Chandra’s car in order to report its location to police.
Lieutenant Yokley had mentioned that initially the case was being investigated as a hit and run, but has now transitioned into a homicide case.
— Ricky Cavazos (@RickyCavazos_) January 20, 2020
Reporters had inquired whether there was some sort of familiarity between the victims and the alleged killer, to which Lieutenant Yokley responded that it seems to be the case.
When the question of if this was a road rage incident gone horribly wrong, Lieutenant Yokley stated, “We really don’t know. Obviously, there was some sort of contact. We are looking into those exact same questions, of whether or not he was known to the victims.”
When first responders arrived at the scene of the wreckage, three of the six teens were standing outside of the vehicle, while three of them remained trapped inside. Firefighters extracted the trapped teens inside the car, and one of them was pronounced dead at the scene. The other two who were extracted later died as a result of their injuries while at the hospital. The other passengers who were inside the vehicle when it was struck are expected to survive.
According to a post on Facebook by the Olive Branch Church & School on Monday, it was noted that all six teens were once students at the private Christian school in their youth.
The post stated, “Our prayers go out to God for His grace, comfort, and mercy to the families at this time.”
Over 100 people were in attendance at Northpoint on Monday night to pay homage to the teens killed over the weekend. Tim East, who is the church’s spokesman, stated the following about the tragedy:
“They were bright young kids that had so much to look forward to and it was taken far too early.”
LET has a private home for those who support emergency responders and veterans called LET Unity. We reinvest the proceeds into sharing untold stories of those patriotic Americans. Click to check it out.
Stefany Nguyen, who is a friend of one of the victim’s family, was in tears describing the event at the church.
“We sang songs to God, just crying out to him for comfort and peace that could only come from him.”
Officials stated during the press interviews on Monday that neither alcohol nor drugs appear to be involved as factors in the case. Chandra is currently being held without bail at the Riverside County Jail.
Meanwhile, California officials are still working hard to create new, unconstitutional gun legislation for the state. LET staff writer and former cop Leah Anaya just brought you this update.
There is a new provision within Welfare and Institutions Code 8103 that states anyone who has been detained on a psychiatric hold twice within a year is banned from possessing a firearm. For. Life.
Psychiatric holds are a good thing (when mental health facilities actually hold the person for the full 72 hour required period, but that’s a different story).
If someone is feeling like they might hurt themselves or someone else, it’s a good thing that police are able to place them on a psych hold so they can get the help they need.
Because, in general, mental health issues, when treated properly, are a temporary thing.
“Don’t care,” says California.
Any time a person is taken on a mental health hold (called a 5150 in California),statue (f)(1)(A) states:
“A person who has been (i) taken into custody as provided in Section 5150 because that person is a danger to himself, herself, or to others…. shall not own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, or attempt to own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, any firearm for a period of five years after the person is released from the facility.”
That’s a little extreme; 5 years is a long time to assume someone isn’t able to possess a firearm based on one incident.
Then comes the next statute:
“(B) A person who has been taken into custody, assessed, and admitted as specified in subparagraph
(A), and who was previously taken into custody, assessed, and admitted as specified in subparagraph
(A) one or more times within a period of one year preceding the most recent admittance, shall not own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, or attempt to own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, any firearm for the remainder of his or her life.”
The REMAINDER of his or her life?
That is insane. Because being held under 5150 doesn’t mean a person has extensive mental health issues. It means that they are in distress; that they have an issue that needs to be addressed and fixed.
If California thinks this statute addition is going to keep guns out of the hands of “crazy people,” they’re sadly mistaken.
What it will do, however, is keep the people who need mental health assistance from getting it.
I’ll be honest: I’ve had a day or two where I was fighting depression pretty hard. I was diagnosed with PTSD years ago and it was a LONG road to recovery. I never told anyone when I was having dark feelings because I didn’t want to lose the right to carry my firearm.
Luckily, I never got to the point of wanting to hurt myself or someone else, or at least not enough to actually go through with it. I went to therapy, I did the work, I got help.
But if I was sitting in my car contemplating whether or not I should call to get mental health assistance, a statute like that would make my decision for me: No way in hell.
There is no way in hell I would have called or told anyone I was thinking suicidal thoughts. No way in hell would I have asked for help. I was still a cop when I was first diagnosed, and I know what that would have led to. No gun= no job.
So, California, you’re telling me that a cop, a veteran, a firefighter, a nurse, or another civilian who has been through so much trauma that they can’t go on without assistance anymore deserve to have their Second Amendment rights stripped away? FOR LIFE?
Not only their 2A rights, but for cops and active military members, their livelihood. Because again, in those professions, no gun= no job.
Listen, I don’t want actual “crazies” to have guns either. Clearly that is a huge issue and very dangerous. People who have permanent and/or severe mental health issues should absolutely be prohibited from endangering the public in any way possible.
But this statute is not the way to do it. It doesn’t say that after an evaluation a person may be denied the right to own or possess a firearm until the person is once again deemed fit to do so. There is no discretion. No due process. Mental health hold? No gun for you. 5 years. Second mental health hold? No gun for you. Forever.
No one wants bad guys or the mentally ill to have access to firearms. California is proving time and time again that it doesn’t even want good guys or the mentally stable to have them.
Except when it comes to the people that protect the politicians and the Hollywood elite. Then they want all the guns.
Look at what state we’re talking about though.
Starting January 1, teachers, school administrators and employers can now ask courts to take away guns from people under an expansion of the state’s “gun restraining order law”, which currently only allows family members and police officers to have firearms seized from people deemed a “public risk.”
The new law will allow the above entities to petition courts to remove guns. What could possibly go wrong? The law was proposed after the high school shooting in Parkland, FL in February.
As with all these feel-good gun laws, this one also skips the little clause in the Constitution called due process. It can take up to 21 days before a court will hear testimony from the person losing the guns. So basically, they lose their constitutional rights under the Second Amendment pending a court appearance three weeks later.
Another law would allow one-year gun seizures to be extended annually for up to five years. Another law will limit residents of California to purchasing one semi-automatic rifle per month, but only if you’re only over 21. I’m not sure but something about “shall not be infringed” is may be getting violated here.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!