CA CA - Mitrice Richardson, 24, Malibu, 17 Sep 2009

[Elliemay]

It would show in her mugshot from the night she was arrested.
I can't remember if her hair was in an afro or in dreadlocks. (I seem to remember her hair being more in a dreadlock style).

ETA: I believe it is being speculated by the family that the mural depicts Mitrice because 1). it was discovered in an area that was known by the public to be a coming focus of search efforts, 2). because it's sole subject was pornographic illustrations of African American women, 3). One of the illustrations showed what appears to be a tattoo on the buttock that says "L.A.", and Mitrice is from the Los Angeles area.

~ Does anyone here know if Mitrice had a tattoo on her buttocks that said "L.A."?

I recall reading on one of the websites for Matrice that she had 2 tattoos, one on her lower abdomen, and one else where (poor memory, can't recall) however I do not believe it was on her buttocks.

 

[smart blonde]

The mural also depicted a woman in a wheelchair, but we know Mitrice wasn't in one, so....? It's not as if her name was on the mural.

Before I actually viewed it for myself, I was under the assumption that the mural showed signs of violence, or some obvious clues as to what may have happened to this beautiful young woman.

I don't know, but without further information, I think that the hateful mural may just be an ugly coincidence that doesn't really tie-in to Mitrice's disappearance.

 

[Fairy1]

Thank you, dreamweaver.
I should have linked the website prior to posting. Sorry about that, Fairy1!

No worries! I just was having a little trouble following along. Still am, actually! I'm not seeing a connection, but maybe they know something we don't?

 

[carbuff]

It's misogynist street art. I'm not sure I'd call it pornographic but it sure is weird, especially the woman in the wheelchair. It also seems like a weird location. But I don't see a specific connection to Mitrice either.

 

[Fairy1]

Mitrice's situation reflects basic mental health rights in this country that hold "freedom of choice" outweighs "protection from potential harm". An adult person person can only be legally held in detention against their will for mental evaluation in most cases if

They are a harm to others. The legal standard is very high here. Convicted murderers and rapists are not held against their will for "mental unfitness" after release despite a proven propensity to butcher and kill others. Mitrice had not been making realistic threats or done any actual harm to others or even the property of another. A vague reference to "avenging Michael Jackson's death" would never hold up to legal scrutiny in this case. It was a blanket statement; not a targeted threat against a known individual.

They are a harm to themselves. The legal standard involves police knowing of a plan, threat, means, of doing injury to oneself. I have not read any report that mentions any of these circumstances in Mitrice's case.

The mentally ill in this country are allowed freedom of choice and freedom of movement, even when it appears against their best interest to others in the community. A mentally ill person can receive a disability check from the government or possess ample assets that would allow them to obtain permanent housing and food. However, it is perfectly legal for them to take their money and make paper airplanes out of it and sleep in the streets half starving.

If a citizen can't be required even to have a stable, safe residence to live in, how can we expect some cop to take one look at an obviously troubled, confused, adult woman and legally hold her against her will......when that officer doesn't even have a witness statement to write up credibly implying Mitrice was going to hurt herself or someone else?

Her family made vague statements that Mitrice was "not herself" or something along those lines to authorities. People at the restaurants clearly stated Mitrice was acting strangely. However, I have never heard her parents or anyone else even imply that they knew or suspected or stated to the authorities that she was a real, imminent threat to herself or anyone else.

After the fact, we seem to be upset that Mitrice was not protected from making foolish decisions and harming herself or placing herself in harm. The courts have ruled strongly, repeatedly, and unequivocally that law enforcement has to meet clear, objective standards before they take it upon themselves to detain us against their will and deprive us of our liberty even if the officer knows a citizen is acting "weird" "odd" "stupid" or clearly against self interest.

I'm confused by your post. Are you implying that LE acted within the law by allowing an obviously unstable woman to leave that station, alone, in the middle of the night without her purse and car? Even if they believed she was simply high or intoxicated, they SHOULD have kept her there until someone could pick her up or let her sleep it off until daylight.

She had been arrested and booked. I'd consider that detaining someone against their will, wouldn't you?

 

[carbuff]

I'm confused by your post. Are you implying that LE acted within the law by allowing an obviously unstable woman to leave that station, alone, in the middle of the night without her purse and car? Even if they believed she was simply high or intoxicated, they SHOULD have kept her there until someone could pick her up or let her sleep it off until daylight.

She had been arrested and booked. I'd consider that detaining someone against their will, wouldn't you?

The short answer is yes, they had no grounds to stop her from leaving.

 

[Fairy1]

The short answer is yes, they had no grounds to stop her from leaving.

She had been been arrested. That's not grounds to hold someone? :waitasec:

I'm sorry, I just can't make any sense of them letting her go into the night that way. And neither can they.

Nope. IMO

 

[Kenon]

I am going out on a limb here. I am sorry, but I feel like the parents are pulling the race card big time. No one said that is Mitrice on the Mural either. You can take it either way. I also think they are begging for money for a private detective. You can all bag on me now. JMO

 

[carbuff]

She had been been arrested. That's not grounds to hold someone? :waitasec:

I'm sorry, I just can't make any sense of them letting her go into the night that way. And neither can they.

Nope. IMO

No, that's not grounds to hold someone after they've been charged and posted bail (or been released on their own recognizance. If she wanted to go after that, they had to let her go. [note the IF]

 

[Fairy1]

No, that's not grounds to hold someone after they've been charged and posted bail (or been released on their own recognizance. If she wanted to go after that, they had to let her go. [note the IF]

She didn't post bail. They WITNESSED her odd behavior and didn't even give her her purse when they turned her out.

I'm quite certain a LOT of folks who are in jail "want to go." That doesn't mean they can or should.

In any case, were the officers so poorly trained that they could not ascertain whether she was high or mentally deficient? Or were they just not HUMAN?

I would love to know how many of them would have turned their OWN daughters out that way in the middle of the night.

Odds are, if they had done the right thing, Mitrice would be alive and getting the help she obviously needed. Instead, they continue to attempt to cover their own *advertiser censored*S*S. And I'm sorry, there's just no excuse.

Sometimes, you just need to do the right thing. That did not happen here.

IMO

 

[carbuff]

I'm not defending them. I don't know what happened. But the rules are pretty strict and I'm not sure they could have done anything if they had wanted to.

 

[Fairy1]

I'm not defending them. I don't know what happened. But the rules are pretty strict and I'm not sure they could have done anything if they had wanted to.

They couldn't wait for someone to pick her up? They knew she was calling her family.

And I can understand them keeping her car, but her purse and ID? Isn't it the law for persons over the age of 18 to have their ID on them at all times?

I'm sorry, I'm just so disgusted with how the whole thing was handled. No one will convince me it was handled properly.

Such a beautiful, young woman. Clearly in distress. God only knows what happened to her after she left that station.

I have a 20-year-old daughter and I would hope that she wouldn't be placed in probable danger by LE - regardless of the circumstances.

 

[Kenon]

I do believe that if they didn't let her go, it would have been a big problem also. What I DON'T get is that they had her car, license, phone and everything she had and let her go with none of it. Also there is no way your ever going to win the police or sheriffs dept. The parent's are snowed by lawyers thinking they are going to get money out of this and they are not. Sorry to say.

 

[Fairy1]

I do believe that if they didn't let her go, it would have been a big problem also. What I DON'T get is that they had her car, license, phone and everything she had and let her go with none of it. Also there is no way your ever going to win the police or sheriffs dept. The parent's are snowed by lawyers thinking they are going to get money out of this and they are not. Sorry to say.

Well, I'm no legal eagle, so I don't know if they were within the law in letting her walk away that night.

And I'm not sure if Mitrice's family is looking for a lawsuit. I'm thinking they really just want to find their daughter.

 

[Salem]

I'm not defending them. I don't know what happened. But the rules are pretty strict and I'm not sure they could have done anything if they had wanted to.

Actually - iirc, LE could definitely have done something. I believe that it was reported early on that Matrice talked about avenging Michael Jackson's death or something and said she was from Mars (or going to Mars). I don't remember exactly, but there was threatening language on Matrice's part - would have been enough to hold her. I think LE was totally irresponsible in this case.

JMO,

Salem

 

[Salem]

I do believe that if they didn't let her go, it would have been a big problem also. What I DON'T get is that they had her car, license, phone and everything she had and let her go with none of it. Also there is no way your ever going to win the police or sheriffs dept. The parent's are snowed by lawyers thinking they are going to get money out of this and they are not. Sorry to say.

I don't think so. LE had talked to her mother, who indicated she was on her way to pick Matrice up. LE could have held her that long at least.

Salem

 

[BelleBelle]

I'm confused by your post. Are you implying that LE acted within the law by allowing an obviously unstable woman to leave that station, alone, in the middle of the night without her purse and car? Even if they believed she was simply high or intoxicated, they SHOULD have kept her there until someone could pick her up or let her sleep it off until daylight.

She had been arrested and booked. I'd consider that detaining someone against their will, wouldn't you?

If you read my post completely and carefully, it outlines the current legal criteria a law enforcement officer needs anywhere in the United States to "detain a person against their will" FOR MENTAL REASONS. If a law enforcement officer detains a person against their will SOLELY for mental reasons (after the processing is done for the original offense and prisoner is eligible for release for that offense), the officer is subject to PERSONAL prosecution for violating the person's federal civil rights, even if the person is behaving VERY mentally "inappropriately".

Please, please reread my post again for Matrice. Any parts you disagree with, you can urge your politicians and justices to change to rules police are forced to operate under to prevent another person being harmed the way Matrice possibly was. The police's hands were tied as far as holding her for "mental defect".

Be prepared for a huge fight from the mental health advocates on the other side. They got the current legal framework in place to protect CHOICE over PROTECTION for people with mental problems, permanent and/or temporary.

ETA: Many physically ill people are released untreated against emergency responders judgement for a similar reason. Freedom of choice outweighs protection from potential harm to self under the constitutional framework at the current time. They can't be kidnapped and taken by force for medical treatment unless it is clearly and imminently life threatening.

 

[BelleBelle]

I'm confused by your post. Are you implying that LE acted within the law by allowing an obviously unstable woman to leave that station, alone, in the middle of the night without her purse and car? Even if they believed she was simply high or intoxicated, they SHOULD have kept her there until someone could pick her up or let her sleep it off until daylight.

She had been arrested and booked. I'd consider that detaining someone against their will, wouldn't you?

Unless there is some evidence the police have that we don't know about, that they had enough to pursue a mental hold on Matrice "imminent threat of harm to self or others", NO, they could NOT legally hold her because she was acting strange.

The arrest & booking was for an offense (not mental status). Once police processed her for that offense she was free to go unless they had the legally defined mental criteria allowing them to hold her against her will. The police invited her to stay and offered her a place to stay, but they could not legally compel her to stay.

Please, if you disagree, read my post directly above. The system can be changed if enough people let their disagreement be known.

 

[BelleBelle]

Elite LASD Divers Search Waters in Malibu Creek Area After Informant Reports the Possible Presence of Bones that Might Shed Light on Case of Missing Woman

This article discusses several developments in the case. Her parents never married, are fighting, and allegations that funds donated for the search might be misused. ............ Sutton has sent emails to all parties who have been involved in her search efforts alleging that the father is misusing mural photographs that belong to her and he is attempting to financially benefit from his daughter’s plight..............



Divers search waters in Malibu Creek

 

[Kenon]

I don't think so. LE had talked to her mother, who indicated she was on her way to pick Matrice up. LE could have held her that long at least.

Salem

Agree with you there. I forgot about that. I don't understand also when they had her car, phone belongings. What did they think she was going to do in the middle of the night.