A police source says that the person who robbed and sexually assaulted a 29-year-old woman at gunpoint on the morning of October 14 near 50th and Hazel, has been caught. More details, including the person’s identity, are not available at this time as the police are still working on some evidence. We’ll post more information when we have it.
The police released surveillance video earlier this week of the suspect, a young African American male, who was seen walking in the area prior to the 50th and Hazel robbery and assault, which happened around 11:50 a.m. The man is also wanted for questioning in relation to at least seven other armed robberies and attempted robberies in the area, stretching for over a month, between October 1 and November 3 (6ABC has more details about these incidents).
November 15th, 2013 at 7:04 pm
Thank effin goodness! Scumbag.
November 15th, 2013 at 7:33 pm
A police source says that the person who IS ACCUSED of robbing and sexually assaulting a 29-year-old woman at gunpoint on the morning of October 14 near 50th and Hazel, has been caught.
Innocent until proven guilty, right?
November 16th, 2013 at 12:26 am
Actually, they can either say that the accused is in custody or that the police claim that the perpetrator has been caught. They chose the latter. Seems okay to me, unless it’s the police you’re faulting for loose language with the press.
December 14th, 2013 at 2:58 pm
The headline says “suspect caught”: OK. That’s WPL writing.
The lede says “A police source says that the person who robbed and sexually assaulted … has been caught”. Either the police or WPL is making a definite statement about the person who has been caught, but we can’t tell from here which one. Maybe the police said that the perpetrator had been caught, and WPL is paraphrasing their statement accurately. Maybe the police said that a suspect in this case had been caught, and WPL was sloppy. But Merdelle, from here we can’t tell whose language was loose.
December 16th, 2013 at 7:51 am
“… we can’t tell whose language was loose.”
Quite. So you’re faulting WPL for not providing you with sufficient confidence that they legitimately reported the story. Should they have used “sic”?
December 16th, 2013 at 6:36 pm
I wasn’t faulting anyone, but since you ask, I’m with cindy on this.
Let’s go back to your original reply to her: “Actually, they can either say that the accused is in custody or that the police claim that the perpetrator has been caught.” Well, *actually*, WPL said both. I won’t repeat the quotations, they’re up there. What they say:
• The headline says [the police] caught a SUSPECT (≈ the ACCUSED).
• The text says that the police say they caught the PERPETRATOR.
Which is it? Unless WPL has sources other than the police—and I wouldn’t bet on it, as they also say “We’ll post more information when we have it”—one or the other of those is wrong.
I’m done with this.
November 15th, 2013 at 8:49 pm
Make me want to swear with happiness! He’s been such a blight on the whole area.
October 3rd, 2016 at 3:22 pm
Hi. Thanks for covering this story. I looked to find a follow-up article on this one, but I couldn’t find it. Can you point me in the right direction? Thanks :).