Boy, 14, arrested after stolen-car chase

By Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer

Police in Woodland arrested a 14-year-old boy suspected of leading officers on a vehicle pursuit in a stolen car.

The incident began Wednesday evening when officers spotted the Kia Sol reported stolen out of Davis and attempted a vehicle stop, but the driver failed to yield, triggering the lengthy chase, according to a Woodland Police. Department Facebook post.

Eventually, the Kia pulled into an apartment complex on West Lincoln Avenue, where the underaged driver ditched the car and led officers on a foot chase before he was taken into custody, police said.

The teen, a Woodland resident whose name was not released because he is a minor, was booked into Yolo County juvenile hall on felony charges of possessing a stolen vehicle and reckless evasion.

Davis police issued a warning earlier this week that certain models of Kia and Hyundai vehicles are at high risk of being stolen, in part due to a social media challenge showing the cars being hot-wired using a USB thumb drive and screwdriver.

About 15 Kias and Hyundais were stolen from Davis between Jan. 15 and 31, with some of them later recovered in Woodland, police said. Davis police arrested an 18-year-old Woodland man in connection with one of the thefts early Tuesday.

“In an effort to to deter criminals from stealing your vehicle, we highly recommend installing any type of steering wheel locking mechanism,” Woodland police said in the Facebook post.

Book ’em, Danno.

In his order, “Shubb criticized the law’s definition of ‘misinformation,’ which is ‘false information contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.’ “

And here I thought we have always been urged to get a “second opinion” about our health decisions, which strongly hints that two completely competent doctors might have disagreements about what constitutes the proper standard of care.

If we go back three years to when this nasty virus began circulating in California, there were all sorts of sincere medical opinions floating around that today we realize were a bit off the mark. Some, unintentionally, were way off the mark. Imagine if we’d had this law back then.

Shubb went so far as to label the definition of “misinformation” as “nonsense,” which it clearly was. But, here’s the best part. He also said that the definition was “grammatically incorrect,” which thrills me to no end.

As far as I’m concerned, the No.

1 requirement for any new law is that it should be grammatically correct. The California bar exam should also have a section on grammar so lawyers and judges know the difference between “lay” and “lie, “affect” and “effect,” “discreet” and “discrete,” and “imply” and “infer.”

Are you inferring that the defendant was not at the scene of the crime, counselor?

No, your honor. You are the one inferring. I’m merely implying.

Shubb also cast a wary eye at the phrase “contemporary scientific consensus,” noting “The statute provides no clarity on the term’s meaning, leaving open multiple important questions. For instance, who determines whether a consensus exists to begin with?

If a consensus does exist, among whom must the consensus exist?”

This judge does have a way with words, and more importantly, he had absolutely no trouble taking apart poorly written legislation.

Better brush up on your English before you set foot in his courtroom.

— Reach Bob Dunning at bdunning@davisenterprise.net.