My View: Sometimes They Get It Right

Share:

Having spent ten years evaluating cases where there are clear overcharges in Yolo County, my first reaction to the $1 million bail was skepticism.  I don’t want to downplay the impact that the vandalism and desecration of the Islamic Center had on this community or on our Muslim neighbors, but buildings can be repaired and psyches rebuilt.

However, given what we now know about the mindset of the defendant, the actions of the district attorney seem more reasonable.  The reality is that I think no bail is more appropriate here than $1 million bail, although the defense will point out that the defendant lacks a criminal history and that the instant offense does not represent a grave threat to the community.  Plus, as a longtime resident of the community, she’s not a threat to flee.

I suspect the defense will lose any motion to reduce bail or even get her released on her own recognizance.  That is the reality of the world we live in, where people filled with hate and anger, potentially afflicted with mental illness, carry out their dangerous fantasies in alarming frequency.

While on these pages I have often criticized Deputy DA Ryan Couzens for his own over-zealousness and, at times, flights into hysteria – he once arranged a full raid with helicopters and SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) team on an Asian compound which yielded a small usable amount of meth and no weapons and then defended his actions in court saying that we do things differently in Yolo – he got it right in this case when he wrote in his motion to deny bail: “In connection with a search warrant of Ms. Cohelo’s (sic) residence her telephone and Twitter account were searched to reveal communications that raise grave concerns for public safety…”

We live in a world where Dylann Roof opened fire on a church in South Carolina, killing nine, and Alexandre Bissonnette killed six and wounded many others just over two weeks ago in a Quebec mosque.  When someone proclaims admiration for people and chooses their first act to attack a local mosque, we can’t just shrug that off as harmless banter.

As Mr. Couzens pointed out in his motion:

  • Defendant openly praised Dylan(n) Roof, convicted of killing nine African Americans in a church in South Carolina;
  • Defendant tweeted (the day after the crime): “Had fun last night … im a hero and no one will ever know how funny it was”;
  • In her messages dated shortly before the crime she was asked whether she had ever “killed anything?” to which she responded: “No but i want to i have dreams and aspirations” and “I would like to kill … many people”;
  • In that same conversation, Ms. Cohelo was messaged: “I’m hoping for a race war so I could show my true talents,” to which Cohelo responded: “You’re so hot.” (Mr. Couzens misspelled defendant’s name);
  • Her internet searches focused on topics concerning hate and violence including “throw jew down the well,” “gas jews,” “quebec mosque shooters” “alexandre bissonnette” and “hate is good”;
  • The internet search included many for “davis mosque” the target in this case but also other potential targets like “danville ca mosque”;
  • “Sandwiched” between searches for “davis mosque” was a search for “bombvest”.

The good news here is that, unlike in the case of Dylann Roof, Alexandre Bissonnette, Omar Mateen, or Syed Farook, we actually got a break and caught this before it potentially became a tragedy.  Talking to people who went to high school with her a decade ago, we find that something happened between then and now.  Nobody seems to know what that is.

There are all sorts of theories, but clearly she has gone into a very bad and dangerous place.  Can she be helped at this point?

I understand that there is talk behind the scenes about some sort of restorative justice process.

I lean heavily on the words of Mayor Robb Davis here.  However, it appears that the investigators held the information, that has now come out, rather close to their vests.

Following the arrest, the mayor acknowledged the harm done to the community, but also pointed to another way.

He told the Vanguard, “Though this case will be prosecuted by the state, in the person of the District Attorney, this is not a crime against a disembodied state.

“It is a crime against real people – members of the Islamic Center of Davis,” he said. “They experience the harms in the most direct way as their deepest faith identity is attacked.”

The mayor continued, “Leaders of the Islamic Center have already expressed that they have a need to understand ‘why.’  They desire the opportunity to face the offender and ask some questions.  Questions like ‘why did you do this to us?  What were you thinking?  Do you mean us further harm?  Do you even know who we are?’  They would like a chance to show the offender that they are human.

“I truly hope that in the coming period that the process of adjudicating this case will include the possibility of a victim offender conference during which these questions can be answered, the offender can take responsibility, and the harms can be made as right as possible.  This is the vision of restorative justice that I believe is important to our community.  Such a process would need to be voluntary but it holds out hope that the victims can have their needs met and the offender, having acknowledged the harms, can be welcomed back into our community.”

In my initial column that only appeared in the Vanguard Morning Newsletter, I took the view that, while this wasn’t a violent offense and nobody was physically harmed, people were hurting.  But, as we found out on January 28, the community had their back and, for many, that was a huge relief.

If there was ever a case that could be resolved through a restorative approach, it is this one.

Clearly, this case is a whole lot more complicated than it seemed the morning after.

As I noted, the act itself should have been a red flag, as the suspect’s demeanor was very chilling.  Watching the video, she was slow, methodical, almost casual as to how she entered the ground, how she methodically and meticulously inflicted damage on the windows and the bikes, and placed bacon on the door knobs.

At the time, it was a bit of noteworthy conduct.  It was not what you might expect to see.  Normally you would see someone run up, do the damage and get out of there as quickly as possible.

Her actions were cold and calculated.  In hindsight, they reflect the actions of someone dangerous and calculating.

But there is also a lesson here for many.  At the news conference, I was surprised that they believed that they could sustain a hate crimes charge.  That led me to ask the police chief later if they had evidence beyond the instant offense – a question whose answer we now know is yes.

People were quick to dismiss hate crime enhancements as “stupid.”  That’s generally been the belief of those on the right – a belief that I have never supported, even if some of the hate crime charges we have seen have been questionable in Yolo County.

This is a good case to point out why a hate crime enhancement is needed.  Without such a charge, this is only a felony vandalism case.  The reality is that this isn’t a vandalism case, it’s an act of terrorism – and, as we see from her communications, a first act.

Because we have hate crimes legislation on the books, we just might have had the chance to have stopped her before she actually physically hurt someone.  Putting bacon on a mosque is not just vandalism, it is a form of terrorism, and we need to have the laws on the book to treat it as such.

For once, the system has worked as it is supposed to, and now we can talk about restorative justice rather than mourning another unspeakable tragedy.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

33 thoughts on “My View: Sometimes They Get It Right”

  1. Keith O

    I understand that there is talk behind the scenes about some sort of restorative justice process.

    I don’t understand.  How can a case where the FBI got involved, a hate crime might have been committed and the bail is set at $1 million with many believing that she’s such a threat that she should have no bail at all not go through the court system?  Was the restorative justice process ever meant for cases like this, I’ve always thought it was for low level crimes.

    That said I don’t think she’s much of a threat and am okay if it can somehow be restoratively resolved.  She seems to have somehow lost her way.  I’m wondering about the conversation where Ms. Coehlo was messaged: “I’m hoping for a race war so I could show my true talents,” to which Coehlo responded: “You’re so hot.”  Was it possible that she was captivated and enamoured by someone and acted out because of this?

    1. Tia Will

      Plus as a longtime resident of the community, she’s not a threat to flee.”

      We have seen a number of instances in which “longtime resident” youths from this country and a number of countries in Europe have “lost their way” and managed to get themselves to jihadist training camps. I do not think that we should assume that an individual who has “lost their way” is any less dangerous because of their position on the political spectrum or which groups they have come to hate. Hate is hate, and violence is violence whether perpetrated by those who hate Jews, those who hate Muslims, or those who hate Christians.

      where people filled with hate and anger, afflicted with mental illness potentially, carry out their dangerous fantasies in alarming frequency.”

      Would anyone believe that this woman was not dangerous based on her act and her social media presence if she wore a hijab and made anti American, anti Christian statements ?  How is this any different ?

      Before anyone makes draws conclusions about the best plan of action, I believe that a psychiatric evaluation is in order, certainly before any thought of release, either on bail or own recognizance. The right place for this young woman might be in a secured mental facility rather than in a jail, but we would not know that without professional input.

      1. Dianne C Tobias

        Agree Tia

        I was surprised at David’s comment about restorative justice. I do believe both the young woman and our Islamic Center neighbors could benefit from the process, but it appears she is in need of a psych eval and treatment.

        1. Roberta Millstein

          I agree as well.  It is too soon to talk about solutions – maybe restorative justice would be appropriate, maybe not.  It is too soon to talk about psychological problems – she needs a professional psych eval and we should all resist the urge to armchair psychologize about someone we are not in direct contact with.  And it is too soon to be making excuses for her as a person who has just “lost her way”;  indeed, “Would anyone believe that this woman was not dangerous based on her act and her social media presence if she wore a hijab and made anti American, anti Christian statements?”  Let us not rush to judgment because she is a white woman.  Let’s wait to see how the facts emerge.  We’ve already been surprised once since all the social media info came out.

          1. Don Shor

            There seems to be a pattern in discussing these things. If the perpetrator looks like ‘us’ — must be mental illness. If the perpetrator looks like ‘other’ — must be ideology. My own non-professional feeling is that a propensity for killing people without remorse is a sign of some kind of mental disorder, regardless of the religion or political views of the perpetrator. How exactly that mental disorder overlaps with the legal system, I really don’t know. Our legal system has multiple goals: protecting the public, meting out punishment, rehabilitating those who can be rehabilitated.
            To me, restorative justice requires that someone be sufficiently in control of his or her faculties to understand the process, and show sufficient empathy/sympathy to be believable. And that still leaves the issue of protecting the public.

        2. David Greenwald

          Don: The issue of protecting the public is going to be present regardless.  She’s just not going to do a lot of time here.  So what do you to address the underlying problems here.  Doing a restorative process doesn’t preclude other solutions.

        3. Keith O

          There seems to be a pattern in discussing these things. If the perpetrator looks like ‘us’ — must be mental illness.

          The difference is Coehlo said herself in messages that are part of the evidence that she had mental problems.  She said this prior to the arrest so it’s not like it’s some type of defense gimmick or someone making excuses for her because of her race.

        4. Eric Gelber

          If the perpetrator looks like ‘us’ — must be mental illness. If the perpetrator looks like ‘other’ — must be ideology. My own non-professional feeling is that a propensity for killing people without remorse is a sign of some kind of mental disorder, regardless of the religion or political views of the perpetrator.

          I agree with the point made in the first two sentences. But attributing this or similar actions to “mental disorders” further stigmatizes mental illness. People commit crimes and do horrendous things all the time. The vast majority of people who do bad things do not have mental disorders, and the overwhelming majority of people with “mental problems” or even clinically diagnosed mental disorders are not dangerous. It does a disservice to people with mental illness to make assumptions or prematurely jump to conclusions about connections between mental disorders and violent or hateful acts.

          1. David Greenwald Post author

            To add to Eric’s point, I think we are taking a lot from an extremely vague statement. Detective LaFond said, “her own mention of her own mental problems” – we have no quote, no context, no specifics. They’ll have a psychological evaluation, but I’m not sure how far we should go with that very vague statement made in an effort to get the judge to increase bail.

        5. Matt Williams

          Don Shor said . . . “There seems to be a pattern in discussing these things. If the perpetrator looks like ‘us’ — must be mental illness. If the perpetrator looks like ‘other’ — must be ideology.”

          Very well said Don.  Very well said indeed.

  2. Roberta Millstein

    Interesting, when Tia and I pointed out the discrepancy in people’s reactions, no one else chimed in… when I pointed it out on an earlier article, I was criticized and no one supported it… but when Don Shor points it out, various men jump in to agree…

    1. Dave Hart

      Roberta, I have pointed out that the biggest problem in our social fabric that has affected our political discourse is the “white male privilege” disease that has deeply infected the right side of normal.  I can’t say it on every last dad-blamed article or people will start to say I’m a one-trick pony like Frankly used to be accused about how Davisites are anti-densification.  I remember your post.  Persist, sister.

      1. Keith O

        Oh please……

        Shaking My Head!!!!!!!!!!!

        So here we have an article about the Islamic Center vandal accused of a hate crime and somehow white male privilege and sexism creep their way into the conversation.

        Only in Davis.

         

  3. Eric Gelber

    … various men …

    Sounds like someone has issues with feeling she isn’t taken seriously by men. Since I’m one of the “various men” who have apparently offended you, I’ll just note that I mentioned my agreement with Don’s first point only in passing and to distinguish it from my comment on the other part of his post–with which I took issue. There was no slight intended.

    1. Roberta Millstein

      Eric, it is a phenomenon that has been written about many times: when a woman says something it gets ignored, only to have the point taken up when a man says the same thing.  It’s pretty insulting for you to make this about my “issues” or “feelings,” which you couldn’t possibly be familiar with.  The phenomenon is here on the page for all to see, but if you’d like other articles on the subject, I’m happy to send them to you.  I’m not claiming that any slight was intended.  I think that people (women, too, although not on this page) do this kind of thing unintentionally.

      1. Roberta Millstein

        And by the way, I agree with what you said about mental illness.  It harms people with genuine mental illness to assume that whenever someone commits a heinous crime like this, they must be mentally ill.

      2. Eric Gelber

        I’m not disputing the validity of the phenomenon. I’m taking issue with your applying a stereotype about men to make judgments about my motivations. Ironic, in that applying false stereotypes is what my comment was addressing.

        1. Roberta Millstein

          Why is that insulting?  We all have biases that we are unaware of and we act on them without realizing that we are.  This  too, is a documented phenomenon.  I don’t see myself as immune from it.

          Look, I see what you are trying to say – that you quoted Don only because you wanted to acknowledge an agreement with part of what he said and yet disagree with something else.  But then others chimed in to agree with Don, having ignored the fact that Tia said essentially the same thing above.  If it had just been your comment, I wouldn’t have said anything.  It was the pattern of comments that led me to say something.  In other words, it’s not you, it’s the pattern.

        2. Eric Gelber

          It’s insulting because not only did you suggest I (and other commenters) harbor gender bias but that I also lack self-awareness when it comes to that bias. I appreciate the belated attempt to draw distinctions now. But your initial reaction illustrates the problem of applying a generalization about a group to individual members of that group.

        3. Roberta Millstein

          I suggested nothing of the sort.  Again, I only pointed out the pattern.  Now it seems that it is you who is determined to find insult where none was given, which I find fairly ironic.  As this conversation has become unproductive and off-topic, I suggest we drop it, but if you would like to discuss further privately, I am happy to do so.  My email address is easy to find.

        4. Eric Gelber

          I’m not interested in continuing off line (or on line). But I’ve engaged in this dialogue because I believe it is, in fact, on topic. It’s about forming judgments and biases about groups and individual members of those groups–e,g., a religion, people with psychiatric disabilities, men–based on over-generalizations and stereotypes.

        5. Roberta Millstein

          Fine.  Then, while joining you in condemning the forming of judgements and biases about groups and individual members of those groups – particularly about mental illness, the topic that is relevant here – I will repeat my original comment, which as you can see, makes no judgements and describes only a pattern: “when Tia and I pointed out the discrepancy in people’s reactions, no one else chimed in… when I pointed it out on an earlier article, I was criticized and no one supported it… but when Don Shor points it out, various men jump in to agree.”

          We should also be careful not to read in things that are not said.

      3. Tia Will

        Hi Roberta,

        I would be happy to see the articles about gender differentiated treatment of ideas if you have them readily at hand. I have heard of studies that demonstrate this point as well as that women are interrupted more frequently in meetings, both by men and by other women, than are men. We know from multiple examples that orchestras have traditionally been segregated with larger numbers of men hired until some groups started doing screened hirings having the applicants remove their shoes so that the judges could not tell from the sound of their heels who was male and who female. The gender gap rapidly closed with this process. I don’t think any of us like to believe that we are biased. However, from my fight to have men have an equal chance to be hired by our obstetrical team based on their resume alone, instead of the assumption that women prefer a female doctor or that women are better gynecologists, I know that this is not true for either males or females.

         

  4. Ron

    “Eric, it is a phenomenon that has been written about many times: when a woman says something it gets ignored, only to have the point taken up when a man says the same thing.”

    I think there is some truth to this.  I think/hope that I don’t normally fall into that trap (although my “significant other” may beg to differ, regarding my self-assessment).  (Having said that, Don’s post above is concise/well-written.)

     

     

    1. Alan Miller

      (Having said that, Don’s post above is concise/well-written.)

      Are you implying men are more concise and write better . . . huh, Huh, HUH!!!!!????!!!!!  Are you?  ARE YOU!!!???!!!

      1. Ron

        Alan:

        Only me, and perhaps Don (but limited to his post, above).  🙂

        On a more serious note, it’s difficult (and sometimes impossible) to know if the general comment that Roberta was making would apply to any specific example.  (Actually, that’s true of Don’s statement, as well.)

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for