Two Charged in Early Morning Car Theft
Clifton Police arrested two men who allegedly stole a Fair Lawn resident's car Friday morning.
Two men who allegedly hopped into and sped off with a Fair Lawn resident's idling car Friday morning didn't get far before they were apprehended in a nearby community, police said.
Shortly after Fair Lawn police put out a bulletin notifying local police departments to be on the lookout for a stolen red 2009 Mitsubishi Eclipse, Clifton police spotted the car driving on Route 21, police said.
Clifton police stopped the car and arrested its occupants, 21-year-old Delvis Vasquez, of Garfield, and 22-year-old Christopher Duran, of Paterson.
Both men were charged in Clifton with receiving stolen property and released back to Fair Lawn where charges of burglary and theft of movable property were tacked on, police said.
Fair Lawn police said Vasquez and Duran allegedly drove away with the Mitsubishi just after 4 a.m. Friday. The car had been left to warm up outside a 12th Street residence while its owner was inside the house.
From inside the house, the car's owner heard the car speed off and quickly phoned police to report the theft. Fair Lawn police then put a call out to other nearby police departments and within six minutes, Clifton police had spotted the car driving on Route 21 and made the stop and arrests, police said.
After being processed in Clifton, Vasquez and Duran were released to Fair Lawn police, who transported them to Bergen County Jail. Bail for each was set at $50,000 with no 10 percent option.
--
NeighborhoodWatch
11:31 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
When garbage like this can wander our neighborhoods freely its time to take a hard look at the helm of our PD
Tommy P
12:00 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Even "garbage" as you describe these young men have rights. I do not condone what they did at all, but the owner violated the law and was a victim as a result.
Chris Antonelli
10:50 am on Monday, May 14, 2012
How they went unnoticed wandering around as far east as 12th street at 4AM is of more interest.
NeighborhoodWatch
7:03 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Tommy P you are a Dolt!
What law says a person cannot start their vehicle on their property ? Do we not have a right to
expect that our property should be secure? YOU and that dopey libertarian stance you take against Gov't intrusion should at least agree that 2 cretins from the urban jungle have zero reason to be in Fair Lawn and even less chance of justification for stealing a residents property.
Sometimes I think you post just for the sake of it
Tommy P
7:59 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
We have lots of stupid laws, many well intentioned. It's illegal to idle for more than 3 minutes. It's also illegal to leave a car running unattended. People are people, we are all equal before the law. These young men had every right to be on a public road at any hour. They had no right to take that care and should be held to account, this story also illustrated why County PDs are a dumb idea.
Your prospective is dangerous, in Sanford Florida a man on "Neighborhood Watch" was involved in an incident in which an unarmed teenager was shot. You have a right to prevent people from being on private property, not public streets.
Jenne
8:08 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
You know, it might be a good idea if the law about not idling more than 3 minutes was enforced. The other day I walked past a mercedes idling in the first parking spot on the street next to the police station, and the police (who were outside checking out their cars) never even said a word to the driver.
Leaving one's car idling while you're not in it is foolish.
Tommy P
9:05 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
The last time I was at Borough Hall I saw three police vehicles running without a cop in sight. They may not know the law exists either. Its a very real problem in NJ. Our assemblywoman alone is sponsoring 125 new laws this session alone. There are over 5,000 bills pending right now. Then we have county government, and the municipal government. Take a look at our municipal government, any idea how many ordinance we have? Did you know they are not all published on the borough's website?
Bruce Knuckle
10:58 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Stay on the idling PD cars for a minute. Working on a idling reduction plan can save thousands of dollars for the town. Spread it across all borough vehicles and your looking at hundreds of thousands. Instead of being bully's and laying off essential service workers, there are the types of things the manager and council should be working on. Then again, this would take an effort to do.
Tommy P
12:37 pm on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Bruce, your scale is completely off, the borough fleet while large is not that big, and until gas reaches $8000 a gallon, we won't be able save to that much money. Although at that point we will have much larger problems.
Chris Antonelli
10:51 am on Monday, May 14, 2012
Ummmm..... You guys are missing the point of the story.
SickOfVictimization
8:13 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
These criminals had only ill intentions!
Nice try with the fear factor of Sanford however the big difference is the young man who was killed there did not have criminal intent nor did he commit a crime! HERE these two predators indeed had criminal intent..further had the owner of the vehicle confronted them he would have been justified in engaging in fisticuffs! Public street is JUST THAT and when such pieces of garbage feign passage upon such to access private property for criminal purpose they need to be stopped unfortunately the only way for that to occur is for the Police to stop and question obviously out if place individuals.
SickOfVictimization
8:17 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Jenne if someone was in the car why would it be necessary for the officers to speak with them? Seems your the foolish one
Go Figure
9:03 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Not sure, but I think the idling law is for trucks only. My friend has a truck and that was what he was told.
Tommy P
9:11 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
See N.J.A.C. 7:27
Idling limit is 3 minutes is for all vehicles with limited exceptions for 3 minute idling include vehicles stopped in traffic, waiting for vehicle inspection or being repaired, emergency vehicle in emergency situations, bus discharging/picking up passengers, or vehicles with a power source used for necessary and prescribed mechanical operation (refrigeration, maintaining suspension, mechanical lifts, etc.)
Bryan w
11:54 am on Saturday, May 12, 2012
True should be prosecuted to they fullest extent however neighborhood watch the urban jungle that you refer to is home to many who respect the law shall we speak on the garbage from Fairlawn who teaches in Clifton
TruthBeTold
4:57 pm on Saturday, May 12, 2012
While pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:27-15.8 (Idle Standard), it is technically unlawful to allow a motor vehicle to idle for longer than 3 minutes, *almost* everyone does it. I would be hard pressed to find an individual who does not warm his/her vehicle up--referring to the passenger compartment--before heading to work on a cold, winter morning.
Despite the victim of this particular theft leaving his/her vehicle idle and unattended, the taking of the vehicle was indisputably wrong and should not have happened.. Fair Lawn Police did an excellent job in response to the incident, as well as Clifton PD for keeping a diligent eye. Vasquez and Duran deserve to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Tommy P
5:12 pm on Saturday, May 12, 2012
I agree with you on idling, lets repeal the law. And I agree with you again on the theft and excellent work of our local police departments.
Fairlawn
8:59 pm on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Tommy p your an idiot! Why are we talking about the idling law!! It's irrelevant!!! Let's say there was a Baby in that car and these 2 hoodlums from Paterson sped off with them!! How are you going to fault the fairlawn tax payer that left his car on his property running for a couple of minutes. Open your eyes!!!
Tommy P
9:49 pm on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Thank you for the kind remarks. At no point did I suggest these young men should be treated as anything other than the criminals they are. I just took exception to treating people like criminals before they are even accused of breaking the law. I don't advocate charging the victim for idling, but rather repealing the law in the first place. IF your going to leave a child unattended with the engine running, I have a problem with the parent, don't you?
Marty Cone
10:59 pm on Saturday, May 12, 2012
Tommy is an idiot, the law needs to be enforced not repealed
Tommy P
9:59 am on Sunday, May 13, 2012
What interest does the public have in the state enforcing that law? If it were all that important, it already would be. I can see enforcing it in a place like The Port Authority Bus Terminal (not in NJ) where the high concentration of fumes in a poorly ventilated area allows for build up. On a driveway in Fair Lawn, warming up the car on a cold winter's day, or AC in the summer, should you really be subject to a fine? Many people install remote start systems for this reason, should we ban those too? Is there anything the state shouldn't regulate?
Cindy Evans
8:04 am on Monday, May 14, 2012
The anti-idling law was put in place due to air pollution concerns. Childhood asthma has been increasing for decades as our air gets worse and worse. There is an inherent benefit to the public to enforce the anti-idling laws.
To imply that the police don't know the law is silly. They can be seen idling for long periods of time on as they do radar enforcement around town even though that is not an "emergency". They can also be seen talking on their cell phones while driving. Maybe they don't know that law either?
I don't understand why someone would make the point about the Chief over this theft. The better question would be, "where are the patrols that were on the street at 4 am?" Clearly they can't be everywhere at once and you are not putting a cop on every corner. The resident who left his car idling needs to take responsibility for this as the theft was a crime of opportunity.
Tommy P
8:36 am on Monday, May 14, 2012
The impact on air quality would be negligible at best. The reality is a selective law where officers have discretion over whom to target. The victim of the theft admitted he was idling and wasn't issues a summons.
You actually highlight a much bigger problem about the entitlement officers feel. From leaving their cars at Borough Hall idling for hours, to talking on the cell phone while driving. These are minor infractions, but if the very person who writes you a ticket for talking just did it, there is a huge problem with that. Aren't we all equal before the law? It creates the type of culture like we saw in Bogota where 2 Ridgefield cops beat an emotionally disturbed 22 year old on sight.