Geo Duarte
By Geo Duarte
Transient had many instances of loud vocal aggressions towards staff and volunteers at, or near the Oak Park Deli (corner of Pueblo and De La Vina Streets), and verbally assaulting security guards responding to such behavior. He is once again arrested, this time for possibly making credible death threats towards specific security guards. [Faces have been blurred out to protect all parties]
After personally witnessing this individual challenging security officers and especially at least two specific officers, plus a German Shepard Officer. With the SBCHS team, he proceeded to remove his shirt and continued shouting while waving his arms from across the street.
It was a quite humid and very warm day. Apparently on this day, the frustration came from the fact that he was no longer allowed on the property and “…just wanted some water.” Although, due to his extensive history of being erratic and alarming verbal outbursts toward others in the area, he was denied.
A small bag of what likely had contained some narcotics was found right where he had been standing. One witness stated that “…even when he is apparently not under the influence of drugs, he can still be difficult.”
One of the main reasons his threats became more credible, was the fear that he is known to carry knives and other larger blades, plus makeshift devices that could become lethal if he were to actually enter a state of uncontrollable rage against those he has already, repeatedly, verbally targeted in recent times. Thus far, the aggressions have only been verbal.
He was heard yelling “I was just arrested yesterday… ” This guy has big lungs and intimidates staff, officers and civilians walking in the area. One volunteer stated she tried to walk around the situation, and went around the parking stucture. “He appeared to be arguing with someone…” She then came around and found he was sitting alone on a bench in front of the small market. And was only shouting by-himself.
In his ramblings he may have said that he is a veteran. This is unsubstantiated, yet critical from a social and community support point of view.
Now, when this guy is soon released. Hopefully his behavior improves and does not escalate futher. And, optimitically, finds the help he really needs.
One concerned-passer-by “joined” the subject having this “disturbing-the-peace” episode and stayed on for moral support for as long as he possibly could. Then, had to leave.This person may have been instrumental in keeping some level of reasoning and conrol over the situation. Moreover, one security officer appeared to have rapport and a level of understanding and respect from the suspected offender, which likely also helped the situation.
Thanks to all of those who responded from SBPD and SBCHCS. There is always hope, people can improve their outcomes, especially with the appropriate assistance.
Pueblo X Castillo, used to live down the street. I love that place! Had many a 3-salad meal there.
He sure picked a supportive area. I hope he gets help and most of all hope he leaves all the medical and support workers alone!
The names and places have been modified to protect the inocent, and for the greater good of our institutions. LoL
See the vid of the rant on Instagram, #Edhat and other pics at #edhatsantabarbara
My understanding is that SB43 will pass the state legislature with broad support, enhancing the state’s ability to “involuntarily commit” a broad range of folks who are clear dangers to themselves and those around them. Will be interesting to see how things play out…
TRANSPARENT – It’s my understanding cops and social workers have always been able to “involuntarily commit” a person as you describe. This Bill has broad support of the legislature but will the Bill include places these people can be housed and treated?
Last Thursday night a pal and I decided to get a late night meal on lower State, but all the restaurants were closing up earlier than their posted hours and we defaulted to a scofflaw propane grill hot dog. As we stood eating the small group of patrons were circled by a shirtless whackjob who shouted threats, saying he wanted to kill someone, and wove in and out of the small crowd yelling at top volume. So this is what our downtown has devolved to. Personally I don’t care if he would object to being involuntarily committed. Lock him up, sober him up, and then see if he is still a threat to himself or others.
Well, well, well. It looks like some are now finally tired of the same BS a lot of us have been tired of for quite some time. Welcome to reality in SB. This clown, just like anyone else, doesn’t get unlimited personal rights to violate others and the laws of society.
V deo of the man in action on @Xtek_Overload Instagram, Will try to put videos on the KZAA 96.5 FM Youtube.
In a different community or state, this kind of fool and any like him would get a real quick lesson from getting punched in the face for that act…taxpayer free. Lesson learned.
If you’d seen this guy, you would not have punched him in the face. He was big, agitated, and clearly not afraid to misbehave.
BASIC – you forgot the part about you getting arrested and jailed for battery, that’s not “taxpayer free.”
What’s to “protect,” the man is in a public place in full view of the public. “Verbally assaulting – possibly making credible threats?” Didn’t know one could be arrested for making these types of comments.
agreeing with Doulie here, while the guy is obnoxious he isn’t a threat. he’s just loud. loud, depressed, possibly having an episode. He needs mental health care, not people arresting him because he was over heated and wanted some water. From reading the story, it seems if they would have just been kind and given him some water, this would not have happened. I deal with guys like him every day at my office on State street. Verbally assaulting and possibly making threats. Possibly isn’t a reason to call police nor is it a reason to arrest someone. Verbally assaulting? All you have to do is ignore that. They want a reaction, if you react, they got what they wanted. I’ve had guys come in and scream at the business owner, right in his face. We have loads of people in town , on our streets, that need mental health care. They don’t get that care and it’s sad.
This guy actually did make the threats. And carries weapons! plus thee security officer reported he felt credibly threatened. The word “possibly” is used in journalism to keep some objectivity. Just like the word “allegedly” in some instances, it avoids litigious repercussions.
I have a problem with people (mostly men) that use the Veteran card. What exactly does that entitle one to beyond what any other person in society is bound to? Craziness?
Also find it strange a TRANSIENT, Is not one moving through the place, but repeatedly in the same spot?
26TPI – I’ll guess you are not a veteran if you don’t know what benefits veteran’s earn due to their military service. Other than earned benefits, veteran’s aren’t entitled to; and don’t expect anything more than what you are entitled to. Relative to mental health issues, a veteran’s may be due to their service. Yours, well, who knows?
26TPI, Being a Vet is not a “male-thing” it’s not a macho-thing it is not an anti-fem thing. Please don’t diminish the value of their service in the armed forces and many of those who later serve in law-enforcement and postal service.
There are special courts to deal with Veterans related violations. There are medical benefits available to those Men and Women who have served. The mental & social dynamics of retired military individuals have specific known dynamics.
Vets are not exempt from responsibility in society! Professionals are aware of their special circumstances, that’s all I’m saying. My brother went to Vietnam. My moms brother was a Seargent and served in Korea and was one of only two who survived in their entire platoon after being over-run. Pres. Eisenhower awarded him the Purple Heart badge (John Munoz). Many of my cousins have also served. Respect to all those who serve including EMS, Fire Crews, Social Workers, Care Givers and any others who deal with Social Challenges, Natural Events and Peoples BS!
Depends on where they served – PTSD, plus possible exposure to various toxins and chemical/bio weapons, some still unidentified.
True 26TPI, yet it’s really not a “card” but a badge of honor for those men and women who have served. Thier “craziness” “could be” as a result of post-traumatic-stress-syndrome or disorder. Many who have served were introduced to methamphetamines while in service depending on the place and the era. Going back to at least WW2, the substances were in existance. The “pilot salt” “benzadrine” the German brand name was “Pervetin.” Hitler himself spoke aginst the stuff, while his doctors were-a-heavily-prescribing, so that the rants could continue.
Another example as to why we still need to be able to put people like him in controlled mental health asylums.
No workie, the One Flew Over the Cukoos Nest, thing did not work, next situation. Mental facilities somewhat do work, they exist, they are called sober living facilities. That is the main issue. ASYLUMS??? You gotta be kidding. Remember freedom? its a thang
Stay FREE and mostly sober my friends
drink water
We do need both monitored and controlled spaces to hold people in these situations (not jails) but the County Health people have resisted this for decades. They have on 16 beds and keep them filled with the tractable clients while this sort of need goes unmet or into jail.
I saw this man just before the security guards arrived, and then just after. He was shouting about how he hates SB, he just got out of prison, wants to leave. Another guy came over to chat with him; they seemed to know each other. Second guy claimed to have just been released from psych ward. I suppose one could say that the loud one was making a scene, scaring passersby, though when I walked by I did not feel threatened. The two security guards I saw were calm and being respectful. There was discussion of whether there was a bus available to take loud guy where he wanted to go. But loud guy was not easy to talk with. Things apparently escalated after I left. I was impressed with the security guard who did the talking.
It’s really to bad our government, the “party of the people” don’t actually help the people.
Mental illness, drug addiction & the state dies not take him in.
Instead they arrest him “again” to soon release him and “ Hopefully his behavior improves ”
Who is this helping exactly? Not the people, not him, not the tax payers, not the businesses, not the patrons.
This is a classic example of our government not at work, not taking care of people, not enforcing the laws of our society, discriminating against tax payers. If I acted this way I’d be in jail awaiting sentencing & a fine at a minimum if not jail time. Discrimination.
Refund my tax money government, you’re not doing what you were supposed to do.
ACHOO – I believe it would take an order by an MD to institutionalize a person. LE or a mental health professional can probably authorize a temporarily hold, then comes the problem. If no crime has been committed I believe they have to be released. If not institutionalized, I doubt they can be forced to submit to out patient treatment. Even then, probably not enough facilities to deal with these people.
Balancing individual freedoms against community needs and the rights of others is tricky as hell.
Obviously we need a national “war on mental health and drug addiction”.
Personally, I’m ready for the pendulum to swing back towards community and the right of people to walk the streets without running a gauntlet of drug addicted, mentally ill, threatening and dangerous people who desperately need help.
It should be entirely obvious to you that no political party is making any progress on the issue.
Get past the red team v blue team thinking.
Doulie, no one has unlimited rights. What we do impacts other people, from punching them in the face to threatening them on the street, to playing music at full volume all night and when we do these things there are consequences that limit our rights.
So, no, the rights of others don’t always come first.
The problem with your statement is the assumption that money and resources will fix all of these issues. You simply can’t convince all people in the grip of addiction and mental health struggles to get off the street, regardless of what you are offering them, because many of these people are living in an irrational state.
There has never been a true treatment based initiative in this country to deal with drug addiction and mental illness.
You ask “where it stops” if we “begin” taking away rights. There is no “begin”–people in this country abdicate their rights by making the bad choice to violate the rights of of their neighbors friend, and family all the time. This has always been true, so, your implication that we don’t “take away” peoples’ rights already is really bizarre.
There are ways to deal with these issues–yes, more money, massive amounts of money in fact, to provide basic safe housing, case workers, addiction specialists, job training programs, child care, etc., etc…. If we had spent the money that we lit on fire to invade Iraq on these things in the US, I guarantee our homeless problems would be a fraction of what they are now.
We need to do this. AND we also need to aggressively go after people who are on the street living in a way that is dangerous for them and others and degrades the quality of life for the rest of us. Both–carrot and stick need to be applied here.
ALEX – The “rights of others” must always come first. Major mistake if we begin taking rights away from people. Where do we stop? What’s “tricky” is the community needs to come up with and maintain a way of dealing with these people given the funds and other resources available. Even if a community decides to violate a persons rights and take them off the street, the same problem exists. How will these people be dealt with? Since the 70’s there has been a National “war on drugs” and it’s being lost. As I’ve said before, I don’t believe this “war” will ever be won. Too many people from succeeding generations that will step in and replace users/dealers. People we choose to lead our community/Nation has a lot to do with how safe we are when walking the streets.
Doulie, you make sense. I wonder if any other countries have found effective systems to deal humanely with difficult people of this sort.
I meant to say that AlexBlue makes sense. But I like to hear multiple viewpoints.
AHCHOOO – Countries/counties? I’ll guess no one has yet to find a way to deal with this issue. For us, we can’t force anyone to do anything.
ALEX – I’m referring to a persons Constitutional rights. No one can lose these rights no matter what they do. Not much we can do other than call the cops because a person bothers us with noise or making threatening comments we don’t like. I’m not “assuming” anything about money and resources fixing this issue. I’m saying, without question, money is definitely needed to obtain resources that may help resolve this problem. Once there’s a place these people can be treated, the next step is to have a person voluntarily accept the help that is available. As long as a person on the street with mental problems does not commit a crime or are a danger to themselves or others I don’t believe we can force them to do anything.
What I’m saying is any action taken against a person must be done with their (constitutional) rights being considered, i.e., are they allowed to do what they are doing. To me it’s obvious people can’t run around punching another person and not be subject to arrest. Threatening a person, depending on what is said, as in this case, may or my not be a violation of law. There are specific elements that must be met in order to arrest someone for making threats. I could stand on the street and threaten you and everyone I see. But, unless these elements required by law are met, I should not be arrested. You may not like what I say but I have the right (within the law) to say what I want. If I were arrested this would violate my rights and the case would likely not be prosecuted. Then, a person might run around hollering the DA is not doing their job. This is a minor example of what I said about rights. But, I’m confident you’re aware we cannot go around taking an action against someone unless they’re violating a law and then the action must be taken as permitted by law.
One problem is: who gets to decide who will be held in a mental institution against their will? I This guy clearly has a will of his own and likely would not go voluntarily. So, if he’s not breaking a law, how do we force him to get care? Many laws would need to be changed. And, of course, we would need facilities that could actually help him.
Please tell me exactly how YOUR political party is helping mental illness and homeless?
10:54 – Did you learn what the Europeans are doing that keeps the homeless/mentally ill off their streets?
Pretty obvious – it’s their impressive social safety net.
Yes, it’s also a cultural difference. Other cultures value people taking care of each other and families looking out for each other–ours is far more driven by the individual and me, me, me.
Maybe we need to take a tip from Europe. Spent the last 3 weeks in major cities in multiple countries and saw less homeless and mentally ill people in the street in 3 weeks than I do in 1 day in downtown Santa Barbara. Why is it so difficult for the US to help these people?
Doulie, if we are found guilty of committing certain types of crimes our right to things like privacy can be and are suspended–you can be monitored and searched while in prison, for example, in ways that could never occur when you are not in prison.
You talk about constitutional rights, but they are extremely broad, it’s the legal framework that exists as a result of the constitutions’ philosophy that determine the legality of our day to day actions. That framework is constantly being being changed and argued over; laws change. d.
There used to be all sorts of laws in this country that would have allowed for a guy like that to be arrested and put in jail. In many countries someone like that would quickly be put in custody. Is that a good or bad thing? It depends on your perspective. If you don’t like being threatened or intimidated on the streets where you live then maybe it’s a good thing. If you’re that guy, obviously he would probably see it as a bad thing (of course if he gets treatment, and re-homed and job trained maybe a year down the line he would say it was the best thing that ever happened to him.)
As I mentioned before, I think we are at an inflection point and there areas of our cities that are pretty much hellscapes. That’s bad for everyone. So, again, as I said, laws can change and IMO, laws should be changed that will take people like this off the street and put them in treatment, wether they like it or not.
Yeah, yeah, now some of y’all can go ahead and call me a fascist or whatever, have at it, LOL.
ALEXBLUE: That is spot on.
By ‘Taxpayer free’ I mean in many other places this clown could get taught the hard way not to be a douche, as opposed to ‘taxpayer-funded’ (think liberal SB, SF, etc) by getting more and more handouts from those who believe in such things (enabling). That’s what I getting at. Hope that makes sense, whether you agree or not.
And if by “big”, as someone said…no, that guy’s fat and slothy. Probably wasted too. I bet someone could walk up to him and knock his ass out if they got tired of his belligerence. Cmon, take a closer look. Cops have a tough job hav8ng to deal with these losers all around SB. It’s a shame.
Yeah, like you said, you wrote in a “very literal fashion.” So, punching someone in the face for yelling at you results in jail time. Jail is not taxpayer free. Weird how unable you are to understand your own words and keep trying to explain it away. You’re words are Basic, right?
BasicInfo805: Believe it or not, most of us “out here” agree with you, of course there are a few vocal folks who think guys like this should get an award for making our lives miserable. You’ll notice that these street folks never pick on someone who they don’t want to mess with our of fear, but pick on those who they feel that they can intimidate (which, by the way, is m-o-s-t people). When anyone picked on me or tried to intimidate me, my go-to response was to get one of my very/very formidable brothers to back me up. Bullies would always slink away when my brother would show up. Not everyone has brothers like I do/did….but just know that these bullies who scream/yell profanities know when they are overmatched and STFU r-e-a-l quick. Believe me….they kinda get quiet all of a sudden when there’s no push-over to push around.
Basic, LOL, dude, when you see that guy out on the street you should try and give it a shot. Then you can treat him afterwards!
I’m not an ER doc. And that’s what he would need. I’m a different type of specialist, and I’ll leave it at that.
Besides that, you AlexBlue missed my point. Here it is: these clowns are being encouraged to live here by folks that vote for politicians that are ok with spending our tax dollars to bring them in. In many other communities in CA, states in the US, and countries in the world – someone doing this will get locked up or beaten up. And maybe he will realize that kind of behavior, that lifestyle, whatever you want to call it, isn’t acceptable. We have to have rules and consequences in society.
That’s plain dumb.
What are you referring to?
I’m not saying I would do that. Re-read my post. I write in a very literal fashion. You have to read each word and understand what it means. Basic.
LOL – doesn’t matter if you do it or someone else does. Your words: “would get a real quick lesson from getting punched in the face for that act…taxpayer free” – My response remains the same. Punching someone for yelling at you will land you in jail. Jail is not “taxpayer free.” Basic.