No charges filed against teen arrested in case involving drugs, stolen car

No charges filed against teen arrested in case involving drugs, stolen car

URBANA — The Champaign County state's attorney's office elected not to file criminal charges against an Urbana teen who showed up to an undercover drug deal in a stolen vehicle Wednesday.

Urbana police Sgt. Dan Morgan said members of the street crimes unit had arranged to meet someone for a controlled buy of drugs on South Philo Road on Wednesday afternoon.

After finishing the deal about 1:50 p.m., the vehicle left. Morgan said officers then ran the license plate of the vehicle the three men were in and realized it had been reported stolen from Champaign some time earlier.

Police then set up a second drug transaction about an hour later. When they tried to stop the vehicle, a 2008 Toyota Rav 4, it fled, Morgan said. Police found it a short time later at Smith Road and Florida Avenue but no one was in it.

Jamonte Hill, 18, of the 1000 block of Geraldine Street, who had been in the vehicle during the initial drug purchase, was seen walking away and was arrested for motor vehicle theft.

Assistant State's Attorney Lindsey Clark opted Thursday not to file charges against Hill, saying there was nothing in the report that suggested Hill knew the vehicle was stolen, an element of the offense she would have to prove.

Morgan said the drug case remains under investigation.

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

Flubber wrote on October 04, 2012 at 11:10 am

Hopefully this piece of trash will get put away this time. But if his gun charges from April weren't enough, it's highly unlikely. Let's just let him continue to terrorize the streets of C-U in every way possible!

787 wrote on October 04, 2012 at 3:10 pm

He's filling the void left by Herbert Shah....

cretis16 wrote on October 04, 2012 at 4:10 pm

Thank you Julie Reitz and the beloved police force......yup, we sure can't blame this child for this incident. I tell you it's a world turned upside down.  When they gave Mr. Peacock a pass on going to prison, I thought it couldnt be topped...Guess I was wrong.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 04, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Profile Picture

They didn't let him go on the auto theft charge because they pitied him.  It was because they didn't have enough evidence.

wilsona wrote on October 05, 2012 at 12:10 am

They didn't have enough evidence to prove he stole the vehicle, but there's this really neat crime that exists called possession of a stolen vehicle.  He was spotted in the same vehicle before by the officers and walking away from it the second time.  Maybe....Just maybe he could be charged with a crime, but no.  Let's just let him go.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 05, 2012 at 6:10 am
Profile Picture

Only if he's the driver or if he knew the vehicle was stolen.  It doesn't specify whether he was the driver or not in the article, and it would likely be hard to prove that he knew the vehicle was stolen.

gftst wrote on October 04, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Wow I dont know what to say...the police go to all the work to catch someone and get someones stolen car back and no charges and hes back on the street like that. Its no wonder there is so much crime lately...

wilsona wrote on October 04, 2012 at 2:10 pm

I wish this surprised me.  Of course they decided to not pursue charges.  Wouldn't wat to go through the hard work of having to prove something.  Easier to wait for a bigger crime to be comitted and hope he's caught in the act.  I'm so sick of this.

Flubber wrote on October 04, 2012 at 3:10 pm

He's already committed the bigger crime, but no one would testify against him...

http://www.news-gazette.com/search/apachesolr_search/Jamonte%20Hill?filters=type:story

 

He's also been arrested 3 times in the last year and a half for driving with a suspended license.

Such a wonderful and productive member of society...

simplecitizen wrote on October 04, 2012 at 2:10 pm

Yes, most people who are riding in a stolen vehicle have no idea that it was stolen.  This guy is obviously innocent.  Can you detect my sarcasm?

ronaldo wrote on October 04, 2012 at 4:10 pm

I've got a great idea.  How about we apprehend a criminal but not charge him and let him go?!

Oh drat, they already did that.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 04, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Profile Picture

Did y'all not read the last sentence of the article?

"Morgan said the drug case remains under investigation."

They're investigating the charge that they might be able to convict him on, and they decided not to charge him for the auto theft because they had no proof that he was the one who stole it.

It's not rocket science.  I know most people would prefer that we just be able to send people to prison without sufficient evidence for what they might have done, but that's not how court systems work in civilized countries.

Sid Saltfork wrote on October 04, 2012 at 7:10 pm

Your wasting your time explaining it, alabaster.  They want someone to blame.  They would prefer to hang him, and give him a fair trial in that order.  The guy is not an innocent; but his conviction depends on a jury finding him guilty without a doubt of his innocence.

wilsona wrote on October 05, 2012 at 12:10 am

He was in possession of the stolen vehicle, alabaster.  That is a crime.  We don't have to prove he actually is the one that stole it in order to prove he had it in his posession.  That's how things do work in this civilized country.  You can't posess stolen property unless you are uncivilized.  He could also easily be charged with fleeing.  Either way, letting him walk away while they decide to continue investigation for another crime isn't really something that keeps our society safe from someone that's obviously willing to commit a number of different crimes.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 05, 2012 at 6:10 am
Profile Picture

Was he the driver of the vehicle?  The article does not say.  If he wasn't the driver, how could they convict him for fleeing the police?  If he wasn't the driver, I think the law states that he can't be charged with possession of a stolen vehicle unless there is proof that he knew the vehicle was stolen.  Although common sense would suggest that he did know it was stolen, common sense doesn't mean proof.

welive wrote on October 05, 2012 at 9:10 pm

you cant help thank the police for making a drug deal and not checking the plates on the car lol is that not sop to run the plates on cars? or just not when they are doing drug deals?

great work