Rock throwers (l to r) James Turetzkin, Philip Williams and Lauren Magaw in the jury box, waiting for their hearing to begin. Photos by Mary Walton
By Charles Layton
All four adult defendants in the rock-throwing vandalism case agreed on Friday to a three-year schedule of payments to 180 victims throughout Monmouth County, including many in Ocean Grove.
Superior Court Judge Thomas Scully told each of the four that if they make good on their payment obligations, perform 75 hours of supervised community service and fulfill some other conditions imposed by the court, they can avoid the normal fines and prison terms prescribed for third-degree criminal mischief. All four had pleaded guilty to that offense on August 23 as part of a negotiated plea bargain.
If any defendant fails to meet the conditions set forth by the Prosecutor’s Office and Judge Scully, all deals would be off and that defendant would then be subject to a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $15,000 fine.
As outlined in court on Friday by Scully and Assistant Prosecutor Kathleen Bycsek, the defendants agreed to pay a total of $117,895.34 in restitution — to victims and to their insurance companies –according to the following schedule:
— $5,000 to be paid immediately by each defendant.
— $679.83 per month to be paid by each defendant for a period of 36 months.
The defendants — Philip Williams, 25; Lauren Magaw, 21; James Turetzkin, 20, and Tyler Emmons, 18 — have all admitted participating in a months-long rampage of rock-throwing vandalism spread over 17 different Monmouth County towns, including Neptune Township. Police have said that 33 of those acts occurred in Ocean Grove from January through March of this year. The defendants would ride around in an SUV late at night tossing large stones through the windows of houses and parked cars. Police in Spring Lake arrested the group shortly after midnight on April 13 after receiving reports that windows were being broken. The defendants confessed to the entire vandalism spree at the police station that night.
Defendant Emmons stands in the jury box. Prosecutor Bycsek is in the foreground
Three of the defendants live in Neptune Township; Turetzkin lives in Neptune City. The name of a fifth defendant has not been released because he was 17 at the time of the arrests; he is being treated as a juvenile.
During Friday’s hearing, Cliff and Barbara Bandstra of Wall Township sat in the courtroom observing the proceedings. The couple told Blogfinger that they were on the list to receive restitution. They said they arrived home one Friday evening to find that the large paladium window in their entry foyer had been smashed. Replacing it cost more than $4,000, they said. The vandals had also hurled large stones against the stucco of the house and done other damage.
Asked why they were attending the hearing, Cliff Bandstra said, “I was just curious to see what they looked like.”
“And what kind of people would do this,” his wife said.
They said they also have a home in Ocean Grove, but were surprised when told that many Ocean Grovers had also been victims of the rock throwing.
The defendants said little — beyond “yes, your honor” — as Judge Scully outlined the conditions of their probation. They were called to stand before the judge one at a time and verify that they understood the nature of the deal they were entering into. During the next three years, the judge explained, they will be supervised under Monmouth County’s Pretrial Intervention program, which is designed for first-time offenders. They must abide by the normal terms of criminal probation, including mandatory drug monitoring as determined by the probation officer.
Scully explained that the amount of the restitution is owed by the four defendants “equally and severally,” meaning that if one defendant fails to pay his share the others must assume that liability.
Lawyers for the defendants noted that the case of the fifth defendant, in juvenile court, is not yet resolved. They asked Scully whether, if that juvenile defendant is ordered to pay restitution as well, that might reduce the amounts owed by the four adult defendants. Scully said he had no influence over the juvenile proceeding, but that such an outcome might be possible.
After the hearing, Cliff and Barbara Bandstra said they were not sure the restitution money they’ll receive will cover all of their losses, but they thought it would come close. Both also said they thought the punishments the defendants received seemed “pretty fair.”
“If they actually come through with it, and live up to it” Barbara Bandstra said of the defendants, “maybe they’ll learn something.”
Cliff and Barbara Bandstra chat with prosecutor Kathleen Bycsek before the hearing. The Bandstras had a $4,000 window smashed by the vandals
Sue, my statement that lawn ornament theft is a greater crime then breaking windows wasn’t my opinion. NJ criminal code states that Theft is a greater crime than Criminal Mischief.
Criminal Mischief is either a 3rd or 4th degree crime or a disorderly persons. For example, damage that totals less then $500 is a Disorderly Persons.
Theft (Simple Theft) can be 2nd, 3rd, 4th degree or Disorderly Persons. For example, Theft of an object that totals $500 is a 4th degree crime
No personal injury occurred in the rock throwing case either. Let’s deal with the facts of the case, not hyperbole.
I hope their community service has a connection to the crime, i.e., they need to repair damage caused by others or Hurricane Sandy so they see how long it takes to repair something that took seconds to destroy.
I disagree with Bullets that the lawn ornament theft is more serious than this. These individuals could have injured someone with their projectiles or flying glass. It reminds me of the kids that tossed a frozen turkey from an overpass or the ones that tossed the shopping cart from the parking garage. Both of those victims suffered irreversible brain damage. Missing lawn ornaments is a nuisance, but no personal injury occurred.
For those who are outraged at the punishment, what alternative do you suggest?
The punishment in this case would not be the same for those who steal lawn decorations. Theft is a more serious crime with a different punishment than criminal mischief.
My concern here — hopefully stated in a way that gets past the Editor this time — is that these vandals will likely just have their parents pay the bill, which is about equal to if they bought their kid a lower-priced car. Have these criminals really learned anything? Has justice for the community been served? More importantly, what deterrence is this “penality” creating for the lawn decoration thief, the Christmas decoration thief, or next year’s bike thieves? What these uncaught thieves know from watching all this go down is that if they finally get caught, there is no real penality in OG other than asking their parents to pay the bill for actual damages.
And to a comment above, I in fact do feel safer when criminals who have been caught in my community are in jail. The problem is that many more folks should be in jail but the criminal justice system lacks the will to hold them accountable — rock throwing vandals included. The first role of government is to provide security and they should step up and do their jobs.
Abbott and Oldtimer are not happy with the court’s decision, it’s not tough enough. After restitution of the victims’ losses, community service is the punishment. At $8.50 per hour (minimum wage), it’s only $637.50, not very painful. The court probably made this determination after careful consideration of the persons involved and the specific situation. What would be better? Creating hardened criminals after 5 years in Rahway Prison? These people are guilty of criminal mischief, and maybe something more than 75 hours would be in order. But let’s be honest here. Did any of the bankers responsible for wrecking the financial system get jail time? Not one. A couple of executives connected with the well blowout in the Gulf will actually face criminal charges. But these kids? Are they really getting preferential treatment? Be glad they have a chance to redeem themselves and pay back the victims. It’s a wise decision.
I understand the outrage, and I understand the desire for strong punishment. But I assure you that having a criminal record and spending substantial time, effort and resources (including the goodwill of their families) wending their way through the criminal justice system is very likely to be a wakeup call to these people who engaged in criminal behavior.
We all have the instinct for more and harsher punishment with the twin goals of vengeance and deterrence. But we should stop and think about what we have achieved by our ever-increasing prison sentences and prison populations. Do you feel safer? Do you feel like you live in a better society? Do you feel like our limited resources are being used wisely? Do you think someone who spends five years in jail is less likely to commit another crime than one who doesn’t?
I’d have to add that 75 hours of community service, barely two weeks in standard work time hours, is almost trivial. The legal system exists to apply appropriate penalties that serve as a deterrent for future criminal activity. I could never have afforded nearly $700 restitution each month when I was twenty-something, but that simply covers the damage they did. Chances are good they will default on a payment and when they do the hammer must fall!
I have to agree with Abbott. It’s just plain wrong that you can buy off the criminal justice system by paying only $29,000 (each criminal’s individual share).
If it is truly the case that you can participate in a crime spree and then get off with no penalty except paying the actual damages, there really is no incentive to obey the law. If these vandals had not been caught in the act, then they would happily still be throwing rocks today.
By the logic of another poster to this thread, it would be OK to steal iPods from Best Buy and then only pay for them if you get caught. You could burglarize homes, but only pay the owners back for the stuff you stole if you got caught. There is apparently no need for any further penalty. The reality is that by having no penalty other than direct restitution, you are almost encouraging criminal behavior.
The rock throwers should have to serve several years in prison and pay a large financial penalty beyond the actual damages caused. I for one would sleep better if I knew that these people were in prison instead of still roaming the streets.
Seems like a remarkably effective use of the criminal justice system. Kind of impressive, actually. Maybe they will actually learn something and maybe the victims will actually be made somewhat whole. (Recognizing that I’ve severely overused “actually.”)
In response to the title of this article … these criminals did learn something very important from this incident and the resulting prosecution. They learned that they can go out dozens of times on joyrides and gleefully destroy private property without any real consequence. They learned that all one has to do if caught committing a serious crime is whip out the checkbook and pay for the actual damages. They learned that they will not get penalized in any meaningful way (no punitive fine, no prison time). They learned that the justice system is a joke — and the laughs are on us fools who respect the law, live decent and moral lives, and who build and sustain our communities through our hard work.
It’s no wonder there is so much crime. Our prosecutors and judges are weak and ineffectual. They sympathize with the criminals far more than the victims. The criminals in this case should have been fined for actual damages as well as a punitive fine (perhaps equal to the actual damages), plus 2-3 years in prison. Anything less for this multi-month crime spree is a miscarriage of justice.
Couldn’t figure out who was responsible for breaking a window in our house with a rock. Now I know. Thanks, Blogfinger.