policeblotter_sfa.jpg

Friday, 1/22/10



1:15 PM: Four guys reportedly ganged up on another man on Muni, beating him up and sealing his phone, before getting off the bus at Mission and Cortland. The victim’s injuries weren’t life threatening, and no one’s been arrested.

7:15 PM: Two men reportedly assaulted and robbed a third man at 25th and Florida, then ran away. His injuries weren’t serious, and at least one arrest has been made in this case.

11:30 PM: One woman reportedly broke into another woman’s house on the first block of Presidio and robbed her while she was at home, which the police call a hot prowl. No report on if arrests have been made.

Saturday, 1/23/10

12:05 AM: Two men reportedly robbed a third at gunpoint as the victim approached his car at Van Ness and Pacific. No injuries or arrests.

2 AM: Three men reportedly assaulted a fourth on the 500 block of Broadway in what the SFPD is describing as a “gang-related fight ensued.” The injuries that ensued weren’t life-threatening, and at least one arrest was made.

2:20 AM: A man and woman were reportedly arguing at Columbus and Jackson, and the man allegedly chose to end the argument by taking off in the woman’s car. No one’s been arrested for this.

11:59 AM: Two men were spotted at a vehicle fire at Grove and Octavia (Uptown Almanac has pictures of the blaze here), and are reportedly considered suspects. No one’s been arrested.

1 PM:A man was reportedly leaving a store at 23rd and Arkansas when he heard shots and realized he was hit. His injuries aren’t life threatening, and no one’s been arrested.

7:15 PM: A man was reportedly walking home on Parsons (a little street near the Panhandle) when he was robbed at gunpoint by another man, who then ran away. No injuries, no arrests.

10:46 PM: A man waiting for the bus by the 4th and King Caltrain station when he was reportedly surrounded and robbed by three men who then fled on foot. At least one arrest has been made.

11:20 PM:Two guys reportedly got in a fight at Keith and Thomas, one was stabbed in a non-life-threatening way. The alleged stabber was arrested.Stabbing, Keith/Thomas.

11:30:One guy threatened another guy with a gun on the 1500 block of Vallejo, and was arrested.

Sunday, 1/24/10

10:48 AM:A man reportedly forced his way into a business on the 800 block of Clay and robbed the man inside of cash. No one’s been arrested.

3:30 PM: Four men reportedly confronted a fifth while waiting for Muni at 16th and Potrero. An argument reportedly ensued, and one suspect from the group of 4 allegedly shot the 5th man, leaving him with a life threatening injury. Suspects in this shooting have been detained.

6:20 PM: Five men reportedly jumped a sixth at 3rd and Oakdale. His injuries weren’t life threatening, and no one’s been arrested.

11:03 PM:A woman reportedly noticed a man setting a bunch of newspapers on fire in front of a business on the 500 block of Jefferson. The guy ran away as the woman called the police. No damage was reported, and no one was arrested.

the author

Eve Batey is the editor and publisher of the San Francisco Appeal. She used to be the San Francisco Chronicle's Deputy Managing Editor for Online, and started at the Chronicle as their blogging and interactive editor. Before that, she was a co-founding writer and the lead editor of SFist. She's been in the city since 1997, presently living in the Outer Sunset with her husband, cat, and dog. You can reach Eve at eve@sfappeal.com.

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • bloomsm

    Have we seen the end of racial descriptions in the Appeal’s crime blotter? I think it’s better if race is not addressed, in that it defeats any argument that crime coverage is stereotyped or unfairly singles out one race or another. Today’s blotter doesn’t mention race, but still gives an idea of the circumstances behind the report.

  • bloomsm

    Have we seen the end of racial descriptions in the Appeal’s crime blotter? I think it’s better if race is not addressed, in that it defeats any argument that crime coverage is stereotyped or unfairly singles out one race or another. Today’s blotter doesn’t mention race, but still gives an idea of the circumstances behind the report.

  • Wil

    /me waits for someone to complain that mentioning the gender of involved parties is sexist.

  • Wil

    /me waits for someone to complain that mentioning the gender of involved parties is sexist.

  • modelenoir

    The argument to exclude race was less an issue of political correctness and more about overall relevancy. Eve included the race of an individual in Friday’s blotter (http://sfappeal.com/news/2010/01/crime-blotter-friday-jan-22-north-beach-street-fight.php) because it was complemented with more information. From what I gather race will be excluded unless the writer feels it otherwise important to include.

    In terms of sentence construction, using “man” or “woman” instead of “person” does nothing to the overall sentence. It doesn’t add anything extra to the sentence. Race was being used as an adjective, and the debate was more about its inclusion being irrelevant unless complemented by other information. That’s only the argument against “man” or “woman” being contextually fine to leave in.

    The argument that adding “man” or “woman” could somehow be sexist has yet to be brought up by anyone that feels offended. The issue has been brought up in a slippery-slope context, but not as an issue in itself. I’d be interested to hear someone’s opinion if they think that gender is not only unnecessary, but actually detrimental to the blotter, much in the same way the race issue was debated.

    Peace.

  • modelenoir

    The argument to exclude race was less an issue of political correctness and more about overall relevancy. Eve included the race of an individual in Friday’s blotter (http://sfappeal.com/news/2010/01/crime-blotter-friday-jan-22-north-beach-street-fight.php) because it was complemented with more information. From what I gather race will be excluded unless the writer feels it otherwise important to include.

    In terms of sentence construction, using “man” or “woman” instead of “person” does nothing to the overall sentence. It doesn’t add anything extra to the sentence. Race was being used as an adjective, and the debate was more about its inclusion being irrelevant unless complemented by other information. That’s only the argument against “man” or “woman” being contextually fine to leave in.

    The argument that adding “man” or “woman” could somehow be sexist has yet to be brought up by anyone that feels offended. The issue has been brought up in a slippery-slope context, but not as an issue in itself. I’d be interested to hear someone’s opinion if they think that gender is not only unnecessary, but actually detrimental to the blotter, much in the same way the race issue was debated.

    Peace.

  • modelenoir
  • modelenoir