|
|
|
Uploaded: Thursday, August 16, 2012, 4:19 PM
Palo Alto residential burglaries surge in 2012
Unlocked windows and doors still primary method of entry, police say
|
|
by Sue Dremann
Palo Alto Weekly Staff
In a string of recent crimes that has become familiar in Palo Alto, thieves made off with $5,800 in electronics during a daytime residential burglary on Aug. 9. And once again, a window was left ajar, police said.
Thieves entered through the open window at a home in the 3600 block of Bryant Street near East Meadow Drive, police Agent Marianna Villaescusa said. The burglary took place between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m.
The burglaries are still part of a crime trend that has risen significantly this year. Palo Alto had 81 total residential burglaries during the first four months of 2012, as compared to 34 in 2010 and 43 in 2011, according to police records. A number of the crimes have resulted in significant losses for residents, including electronics, cash and jewelry that often has sentimental value as well as financial.
Palo Alto police said that residents are still not getting the message, despite a vigorous crime-prevention campaign since March 28 dubbed "Lock It or Lose It!" In 50 to 70 percent of the recent burglaries, the thieves entered through an unlocked window or door, Palo Alto police spokesman Lt. Zach Perron said Thursday, Aug. 16.
And in the high-profile July 17 burglary of the home of late Apple CEO Steve Jobs, alleged burglar Kariem McFarlin told investigators he used a key from an open storage space to enter through the front door. The home, which was dark, was undergoing renovation at the time. No alarm went off and lights did not turn on, according to the investigators' report.
Palo Alto had 12 residential burglaries in July and at least 10 through Aug. 14, according to police logs. The July burglaries were in Downtown North, Crescent Park, Community Center, Duveneck/St. Francis, Midtown, Charleston Meadows, Old Palo Alto and Barron Park neighborhoods.
Burglars in August hit homes in Greater Miranda, Barron Park, Fairmeadow, Palo Verde, Midtown, University South, Community Center, Crescent Park and Greenmeadow, according to a police burglary map and logs.
The problem is not only in Palo Alto, according to Perron. "Everybody's numbers are high right now," he said.
But Palo Alto has had its share of high-profile residential thefts, as spotlighted in the Jobs case. McFarlin allegedly took Apple electronics, Tiffany jewelry valued at $66,000 and Jobs' wallet, among other items. And three other Palo Alto thefts involved $70,000 in jewelry and electronics from one home and a combined $24,000 in cash, jewelry, electronics and firearms from two others in March.
Also in March, Mountain View residents lost $20,000 in jewelry and cash and another had $40,000 stolen. In both cases safes were taken, according to police.
In about half of these cases, the thieves entered through an unsecured or open door or window, according to police.
As scary as the reports of five-figure losses might be, increased police patrols, public awareness and phone-ins of suspicious behavior have contributed to the arrests of several people that resulted in a downward trend. In the first three months of 2012 before "Lock It or Lose It!" went into effect, January had 21 burglaries, February had 22 and March had 31, police said.
The trajectory began dropping significantly in April, when there were only seven burglaries, according to the department. The current number, while higher, is still dramatically lower than the early months before the program began.
But even with the extra police presence on the streets, capture of criminals, crime-watch programs and a social-media campaign on Facebook, Twitter and rBlock, Perron said locking windows and doors is still the most important deterrent.
He speculated that the recent hot weather might be contributing to residents' lapses in locking up their homes, since people do not want to return to a hot house. But the feeling of violation and powerlessness in the aftermath of a burglary should outweigh the temporary discomfort of a stuffy house.
Residents still have control over closing doors and windows, he said.
"That is singularly the best message we can give. We can only hope that people hear it," he said.
Related story:
• Tiffany necklace, iPads reported stolen from Steve Jobs' homeAre you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by susie, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Aug 16, 2012 at 5:23 pm Sad, Old Palo Alto is gone. Safety. Smart liberal people. Engineers who put brain power above Money.
Now the schools are beholden to Tiger Mothers, [portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff] money rules the day at Facebook which is a media company not a technology company, and now burglars are terrorizing the neighborhoods.
That was a golden age. Welcome to the ratrace Palo Alto.
|
|
Posted by Phil, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Aug 16, 2012 at 5:24 pm With the police department having to do more with less due to a string of budget/personnel cuts, it is truly imperative for everyone to take the essential precautions to reduce the chance of being targeted for a burglary. The vast majority of home burglaries take place during the day. Not only do we need to keep our doors and windows locked, but we must secure side gates and make it difficult for criminals to access our side and rear yards. Criminals prefer the side doors and windows so they're not seen from the sidewalk or street. That's why it's important to secure those access gates. Don't make it easy for them, harden the target, and keep an eye on the neighborhood and report any suspicious people or activity.
|
|
Posted by Joe, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Aug 16, 2012 at 6:53 pm > doing more with less ..
This is common belief of the police boosters in towns like Palo Alto, but there isn’t a lot of fact, or common sense, prevailing in statements like this one.
The police have resorted to a kind of “bunker mentality” concerning these home robberies. They have suggested that a locked window will keep burglars out of an home when the resident is out, suggesting it would seem, that a pry-bar, or a hammer, won’t open a locked window. The fact that these accesses made it easy for the crooks does not mean that these homes would not have been otherwise robbed.
The police have steadfastly ignored obvious technologies—such as home surveillance systems, as well as city-wide surveillance systems.
Comcast Home Security:
Web Link
Security Systems Review:
Web Link
We’re beginning to see video surveillance systems that are linked a person’s cell phone.
The police can not guarantee that these systems will protect homes, but they could at least test some of them out. The police can guarantee that the video footage will be acceptable to the police investigators and it will be used by the investigators. Right now, the police seem to not have any clearly published position on these systems.
There also is the issue of Palo Alto’s being so small that criminals can come here, spend five minutes robbing someone’s place, and be 50 miles away in an hour. Without fingerprints, or witnesses, what is are the police supposed to do? With the advent of GPS technologies being embedded in a lot of personal electronics, sometimes the perps get sloppy and the cops get lucky. But if the perps are slick, and disable the equipments locators, then the police have to wait until they make some other mistake—like trying to sell the stolen equipment to an undercover police officer, or they get caught up in a sting.
It’s not at all clear just how much cooperation is going on between the 50-100 agencies in the nearby communities. If this cooperation is not significant, then we would probably have to conclude that the police are doing less with more.
|
|
Posted by Mr Jinks, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2012 at 12:03 am The city and the police could do more, I don't buy this budget cut theory. The city has a huge revenue and excessive taxes, rates are higher than many places. There are tons of worthless jobs that can be eliminated and we can then afford to keep the police strong. If something isn't done soon this whole situation is going to get messy. It's time to get off their duff and get this problem handled! M Jinks, Crescent Park
|
|
Posted by huh?, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2012 at 8:10 am Joe you want the police to be in the business of endorsing commercial products and installing them in homes? That's nuts. I have one and I think it would greatly help if anything ever happened to my house. I don't need nor want anyone to do it for me, there's enough "big brother" around. I see the common sense/facts you say are lacking. It goes, budget cuts, staffing cuts, etc, rise in burglaries. I would bet any pictures you could provide the police would be appreciated, not opposed. The bunker mentality is common sense too. But way to put a spin on it. Maybe we should look in the mirror for once, then outside. How many of us sit on our front porch anymore? We should all be reporting anything suspicious we see.
|
|
Posted by Joe, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2012 at 8:58 am > you want the police to be in the business of endorsing
> commercial products and installing them in homes?
No, nor did I endorse that idea.
What I did endorse is the idea that there are now state-of-the-art surveillance systems for residences that offer far more protection than doing nothing. What I am suggesting is that perhaps the police encourage residents to consider investigating these systems, rather than suggesting that locked, glass windows will keep burglars away.
What I did endorse was having the police provide a simple way for people to pipe feeds from their home surveillance systems to the police, so that these feeds could be seen by both dispatch operators, but possibly even by police officers on-route in their cruisers. There are many possibilities here, that are not being even considered by the police at this time.
> We should all be reporting anything suspicious we see.
And just what is “suspicious”? The last police chief was fired because she claimed that her officers were going to monitor people who looked “suspicious” (or were wearing headbands, etc.). Given our politically correct posture towards “diversity”—how do you characterize “suspicious” anymore? Yes, seeing three guys with bandanas over their faces hauling your neighbor’s TV out of his house is probably “suspicious”. But how often does that happen?
|
|
Posted by Video, a resident of the Greendell/Walnut Grove neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2012 at 12:49 pm Can anyone recommend a good home surveillance system that allows remote monitoring by the owner and that doesn't break the bank?
|
|
Posted by Happily ever after(PA), a resident of another community, on Aug 17, 2012 at 1:19 pm Why would anyone chose to live in PA when the surrounding cities have it so much more together? Schools? It used to be that, but now, as mentioned above, the Tiger Moms have turned them into study-bot factories with many kids needing time off AFTER high school to heal up from the burn out. Not for me, but if that's your kind of thing, enjoy.
|
|
Posted by musical, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2012 at 1:41 pm I didn't choose it. I was born here. Too lazy to move. Too broke to have anything worth stealing.
|
|
Posted by Phil, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2012 at 5:46 pm Anything we can do as residents to harden the target for burglars is a good thing, and that includes video surveillance. It's also critical to secure doors and windows, as well as side gates that left unlocked will allow a burglar to operate unseen from the street in most cases. These criminals are going to look for the path of least resistance. The vast majority do not want to risk a confrontation with the homeowner, nor do they want to attract attention to themselves by making noise created by smashing a window or kicking in a door. Why should they when so many people leave their doors and windows unlocked giving them easy access. They case and test homes that are left unsecured. Taking these steps isn't a bunker mentality, it's just common sense.
|
|
Posted by Mayfield Child, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Aug 20, 2012 at 1:08 am Mr. Jinks~
> "There are tons of worthless jobs that can be eliminated"
Such as ?????
|
|
Posted by Go PAPD, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Aug 20, 2012 at 12:37 pm "Palo Alto police said that residents are still not getting the message..."
Alas, I think it's the police department that isn't getting the message. Remember who the bad guys are. Crime is up dramatically, and getting on top of it should be your top priority. Don't blame the victim. We support you! Now go out and catch some bad guys!
|
|
Posted by Jimmy, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Aug 20, 2012 at 12:42 pm Video asked, "Can anyone recommend a good home surveillance system that allows remote monitoring by the owner and that doesn't break the bank?"
Google Dropcam. The camera is $150 and streams the video via your WiFi to their servers and stores the video. The set-up is ridiculously easy. You can set it up for motion detection.
I dont work for them, i just love the product.
|
|
Posted by musical, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Aug 21, 2012 at 8:53 am Looks like another $100/year subscription for Dropcam to be useful, i.e. 7-day video storage in their "cloud". Also might want your WiFi and the Dropcam on battery backup. Nice advantage over home recording devices is if burglar finds camera, the incriminating video is already recorded where he can't reach it.
|
|
Posted by Frank, a resident of another community, on Aug 21, 2012 at 2:45 pm Frugal Home Security Tips
Web Link
|
|
Posted by Ted, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 7:21 pm The site I used to compare home security system is besthomealarmsystemshq.com.
Web Link
|
|
|
| |
Best Website
First Place
2009-2012
|
Send this story
Print this story
