Skip to main content

Hot Prowl Sexual Assault Suspect Apprehended

Los Angeles - On June 23, 2008, at approximately 3:45 a.m., the victim, a 7-year old girl, was asleep in her residence in the 200 block of North Park Paseo Lane, when the suspect, later identified as Alexander Linares, attempted to sexually assault her. The victim alerted other sleeping family members by screaming. Linares then attempted to flee the scene but was apprehended by the victim’s parents after a struggle. Her parents were able to detain Linares until the police arrived.

Linares had managed to cut a hole into the screen of an open downstairs window and entered the residence through the open window. He then entered the residence, and stole money from a wallet inside one of the bedrooms. Linares found the girl sleeping in her bedroom where the assault with intent to commit a lewd act with a child occurred.

Linares was arrested and booked for Penal Code Section 288(A)-Lewd Acts with a Child. The case was presented to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office and the US Attorney’s Office, Domestic Security and Immigration Crimes Section. The District Attorney’s Office filed multiple charges which included assault with the attempt to commit rape and burglary. The US Attorney’s as well as Immigration Customs Enforcement filed a warrant for federal charges 1326 (a)(b)2-Illegal re-entry following deportation. If convicted of the state charges Linares faces multiple life sentences. The maximum statue penalty for the federal charges is 20 years.

Linares is Hispanic, brown hair, brown eyes, 5’ 5”, 130 pounds, 32 years of age. Linares listed his address as transient but might frequent the area of the crime. His photograph is being withheld due to the possibility of other victims or witnesses who might have had prior cases involving Linares.

Anyone with information is asked to contact Detective Teresa Curtis or Lieutenant Felicia Hall, Robbery-Homicide Division, at 213.485.2921. On weekends or during off-hours call the 24-hour toll free number at 1-877-LAWFULL (529-3855).

The community is reminded to keep their windows and doors secure while sleeping and to notify the police if anyone is seen lurking around their neighbor’s property. See, LAPD.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...