Student Who Stole MAGA Hat Off Another Student’s Head Faces Year in Jail
“The next court date on the matter is slated for March”
Jail may seem like an extreme punishment in this case but left wing students have been so out of control since the election. Maybe this would serve as a good warning to others.
The College Fix reports:
Student who stole MAGA hat faces up to one year in jail after DA files charge
A UC Riverside student who stole a peer’s Make America Great Again hat off his head and refused to give it back now faces steep legal consequences.
A criminal complaint provided to The College Fix by the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office states that Edith Macias has been charged with one misdemeanor count of grand theft for the September 27 incident.
The next court date on the matter is slated for March, and the maximum penalty Macias faces if convicted as currently charged is one year in county jail, a spokesman for the DA’s office told The Fix.
The charge was filed after UC Riverside student Matthew Vitale, the student who had his Make America Great Again hat stolen from off his head, decided to press criminal theft charges against Macias.
According to the declaration in support of an arrest warrant, Macias told the officer who responded to the incident that the reason she swiped the hat was because it represented “genocide of a bunch of people.”
“She stated she wanted to burn the hat because of what it represented,” it states.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I thought to make a theft “grand”, the item stolen had to have a value of greater than $500 (or something).
In some jurisdictions, another tripwire is direct interaction with the victim.
You’re right. I looked up California Penal Code Section 487. The normal trigger point is $950, but the value doesn’t matter “When the property is taken from the person of another.”
can’t she also be charged with a personal attack alongside the theft ?
actually she sounds like she needs psychiatric help.
In Texas, this would definitely qualify as “theft” and be punishable by up to 6 months in the County Jail, $2000 fine, or both.
A legal (if overzealous) case could be made for “Robbery” and would be a 2nd degree felony if it could be shown that Edith Macias “intentionally or knowingly threatens or placed Matthew Vitale in fear of imminent bodily injury or death”, which would be punishable by 2-20 in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Prison Facilities, a $10,000 Fine, or both.
Dear Snopercod:
It’s a misdemeanor. Misdemeanor penalties are up to one year in jail.
I’m in Georgia, and our misdemeanors (crime below felony) the maximum imprisonment is also one year.
Doubt seriously she’ll get that, but in a misdemeanor, it’s always on the table. But highly unusual, to be mild about it.
Per cites above, in CA it’s a felony. GA law is irrelevant.
“Edith Macias has been charged with one misdemeanor count of grand theft …” Good reading skills.
See above that she’s fortunate this didn’t happen in Texas.
Go ahead and lock her up, her behavior was deplorable
ISWYDT… 😎
Bravo!
Unlikely that she will see more than a day in the county lockup – and that if she was actually arrested and had to wait for a bail hearing. Unless, of course, she has a criminal record beyond a sealed juvenile record (and that is also unlikely). She will most likely be sentenced to a minor fine and a short period of probation, neither of which will serve to dissuade her from such actions, just make her more careful about being identified.
she just established ‘street cred’ and unless she is nuts, will lead to a politics future – even and especially if she is nuts.
Maybe. With cases that have a moderate profile to them, prosecutors and District Attorneys sometimes get squirrelly, because so many people are watching, and a “light sentence” could lead quickly to a LOT of bad press regarding how the laws are unequally applied to the progressive nutjobs.
If Matthew Vitale wants to push on it, I bet she at least sees a long probation period (1 year plus) and ends up with a “theft” conviction on her record at the end of it.
Plus, it’s possible that Matthew Vitale could then leverage any conviction to sue her personally, if he really wants to make her suffer and send a message.
The lesson will be lost on this snowflake. She’ll cite it as yet another example of how evil white people are.
Either that or she will be crying like a baby in court with a completely different story given to her by her attorney.
Though this being Crazyfornia the chances of her getting a judge who won’t just let or off for political reasons is slim.
30 days in the slammer will bring a halt to such activity in that county.
Shooting admirals pour encourager les autres is unbecoming of a justice system in a free country. No matter how obstreperous Macias was, this was a juvenile hat-snatching and he got the hat back. It should never have reached a courtroom. At worst, she deserves a suspended sentence and some onerous community service.
Whether the university ought to disinvite Ms. Macias from campus permanently for causing a disturbance and demanding the student union do something about a hat is another matter.
I don’t think she ought to be shot, nor even jailed and the key thrown away. She should suffer consequences for her actions against another person (hint: she wasn’t attacking the hat).
Prosecution always has a component of pour encourager les autres, though most criminals are too stupid to take the lesson to heart (often when it is they who are being prosecuted). Sadly it is more likely she won’t really suffer any consequences and thus will learn next to nothing from the experience. She probably won’t even have to suffer the expense of paying for an attorney.
No it wasn’t.
It was a terroristic threat meant to make sure that the victim was intimidated.
“You feel safe cuz you got the cops and politicians on your side. Youre not safe… just saying. We need to make racists scared.””
See my commentary above about this being capable of being classified as 2nd Degree Felony Robbery if this had occurred in Texas.
Unfortunately, I doubt seriously that the university will punish her in any way. After all, the “diversity officer” will argue that the thief was “triggered” by the guy’s wearing “that hat” and just couldn’t be expected to help reacting the way she did. Or something.
Remember, even though it was ‘just a hat’ it was also the private property of another student that she had stolen by physically taking it from his person, which brings with it assault charges in addition to the theft. According to the video of the incident she refused his reasonable requests for the hats return, refused the staff’s entreaties to return it, and threatened to destroy the hat during a tirade laced with profanity and delusional claims.
Court action should also include a sanity hearing, as this little girl is in dire need of help with her mental health issues. (Our government is running a program of genocide against people of color right now?)
Funny, she didn’t mention the Mexican practices RIGHT NOW, of beheadings, kidnapping, torture, assassination. Or the historical practices of human sacrifice. Or whereever she’s from.
She won’t face a single day in jail.
I agree that she won’t get a jail sentence, especially if she puts on a good show of fake repentance. The court and law enforcement are probably annoyed at her victim for refusing to let the whole thing just go away.
Close the Fed: Per cites above, in CA it’s a felony. GA law is irrelevant.
Grand Theft in California can be charged either as a Misdemeanor OR as a Felony under California Penal Code 487. It looks like the Prosecutors have chosen to prosecute it as a Misdemeanor.
The article states that the victim “decided to press criminal theft charges against Macias”. To my knowledge only prosecutors have the ability to “press charges”.
For this incident I think jail time is a bit much … certainly not a year … but … as charges have been filed and the evidence looks more than clear cut … Macias should suffer consequences of a degree large enough to make her think twice the next time she wants to enforce her will on someone else.
Kind of.
A Prosecutor generally can’t go forward with a prosecution unless they have a “complaining witness” (aka a willing victim) of the offense who is there to testify about it. There ARE exceptions where a Complaining Witness has been otherwise recorded / interviewed immediately in the wake of the incident / or there is some other physical evidence of the crime, but those start to create problems with authenticity.
While the vernacular of “pressing charges” is used by all, basically it is the Complaining Witness being willing to give a credible statement, and requesting that the Police proceed to prosecute the offender, which is the ultimate decision of the District Attorney where the alleged crime occurred.