A 43-year-old man who allegedly led sheriff's deputies on a pursuit through Encinitas and Solana Beach is behind bars.In completely unrelated news, Union Kitchen & Tap held its 4th Anniversary party that same evening, on the same block as the stop signs at 101 & K and Second & K.
A sheriff's deputy attempted to stop a vehicle driven by Steven Richard Leacock around 9:20 p.m. Sunday, June 7 after he allegedly blew through stop signs at the intersections of Second and K streets and South Coast Highway 101 and K Street in Encinitas, sheriff's Sgt. Rich Eaton said.
However, the driver refused to pull over. Leacock briefly stopped in the vicinity of South Coast Highway 101 and Chesterfield Drive, but then sped off and headed the wrong way on southbound Interstate 5 [sic: if he was heading the wrong way and ended up in Solana Beach, he was going south on northbound I-5] Eaton said.
Deputies terminated the pursuit, but saw the suspect's vehicle exit the freeway and drive into an apartment complex at 700 S. Nardo Ave. Eaton said Leacock then ran from the vehicle.
Leacock was quickly found and placed under arrest on suspicion of felony evading a peace officer with wanton disregard for public safety. He was booked into the Vista Detention Facility and was being held in lieu of $50,000 bail, according to Eaton and jail records.
Monday, June 8, 2015
Downtown vibrancy update
Del Mar Times:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One has NOTHING to do with the other...To try and link these is callous and wrong. While there are many things wrong with the downtown bar situation to link them with a wrong way driver on the 5 is the same thinking that our trusted city council , management and staff use when it comes to logic and reason.
ReplyDeleteDo you know something we don't about the incident or the driver?
Delete'Cause a wrong-way freeway driver who just happened to start his trip blowing two stop signs in a well-known bar district is kind of an amazing coincidence.
Cars blow through stop signs everywhere in town, but the cops focus on downtown so they're probably 100 times more likely to give chase in that area. And notice the charges do not include driving under the influence. Not excusing some wreckless jerk who is a danger to all in the least, but your suggestion of intoxication / Union's anniversary party may appear to be make sense, the absence of DUI charges makes that assumption a stretch IMHO.
Delete"placed under arrest on suspicion of felony evading a peace officer with wanton disregard for public safety"
ReplyDeleteEU, you are making a leap that borders on slander here. None of the news reports mention alcohol or DUI. You can lookup his charges and booking information here: http://apps.sdsheriff.net/wij/wij.aspx His booking number is 15736765. The public information confirms that there are no alcohol related charges in this incident.
So I'll pose your question back to you: Do you know something we don't about the incident or the driver?
--FP.
If they have felony evasion charges to hold him on, there's no need to specify the (misdemeanor) DUI charges.
DeleteWait for the arraignment.
EU-
ReplyDeleteIndeed.
Deductive reasoning vs. Inductive reasoning?
I'm going to side with the wisdom of the writer of this here blog on this one.
I read what EU had to say and he said nothing about alcohol or DUI. I think you are stretching it 1:04 or just like to read words that are not there.
ReplyDeleteUnless you are or have been involved with the sheriff's department, that link you shared is difficult to get around. I couldn't find anything on the booking number, etc.
I certainly implied DUI. I expect we will see DUI charges when they get around to listing all the offenses. Felony evasion is plenty to hold him on for now.
DeleteOccam's razor: what's the most likely reason for someone to blow through two stop signs at 9pm in a bar district and then drive the wrong way on the freeway?
Maybe he was drinking in the park.
Delete1:31 Sorry, I missed your implication of DUI.
DeleteThe Union pulls out all the stops for a good time~!
ReplyDeleteJust fortunate no one was injured or killed.
This time.
DeleteThe Sheriff is advocating that Encinitas hire on another patrol position to cover the expansion of the popularity of the area. The insinuation is that they might help police the downtown booze-a-thon, but emphasis seems to be on the beach itself. Lifeguards should be sufficient coverage for the beaches; why have a sheriff on duty? Have some of them walk a beat in the downtown area on the weekends - that'd be much more effective in curbing problems. It sounds like an additional position won't change much of what is currently going on downtown.
ReplyDeleteI can't be sure but it looks like The Union is expanding it's area to make it larger. Does anyone know anything about this? Perhaps it is another business going in if it isn't expanding?
ReplyDeleteThe patio has always been part of their property, but the SRF and other locals prevented them from using it as outdoor bar/restaurant space.
DeleteHaven't heard if anything has changed.
But most likely it will change! This will enhance their business considerably, so they won't be letting it go. SRF will argue noise abatement, since their meditation temple would be adversely impacted if the patio is opened to boisterous drinkers.
DeleteA lot of peoples' voice volumes increase under the influence of booze. I suppose their conversations are emphasized to a greater degree when the volume is doubled or they're competing for attention. Booze is a drug of the emotions and many people can't control either.
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't drunk...and he drove North from Lomas Santa Fe onto the I5 South off ramp and towards oncoming traffic...he then made a U turn on the freeway and drove south..getting off at Via De la Valle. He tried to run but was quickly caught by the deputies...listened to it on my scanner...good job Encinitas Sheriff thank you
ReplyDelete3:42 AM How do you come to the conclusion that he wasn't drunk - the driving route and maneuvers that he took? He went from a traffic ticket to felony evasion and endangering the public - and the motivation for that brilliant move? Sounds like booze to me.
Delete"Sounds like booze to me."
DeleteBased on what evidence?
Bad judgment - the escalation of severity of consequences. (Unless he was packing heroin in the car.)
DeleteAnd of course people are more likely to use bad judgment when they're sober, right?
DeleteLet's not forget the 3 strikes law. How eager is a felon to get away who's on his 2nd strike in CA? Pretty damn.
DeleteLast I checked, running a stop sign isn't a 3rd strike!
DeleteNot to mention the driver is a longtime youth soccer coach, so probably not a 2-strike felon.
DeleteDenny Hastert, line 3.
DeleteOh 3:42... Please don't let facts interfere with EU's agenda here. According to EU, anyone arrested in North County these days must have been drinking in downtown Encinitas. EU has become lazy and bitter. This blog used to be fairly informative but is now a complete farce. The dumber it becomes, the easier it is to discredit.
ReplyDelete8:57 must be talking to himself.
Delete10:13 AM
DeleteActually, 8:57 AM is talking for a lot of us. Notice how quickly the next entry went up. Followed the tried and true "Squirrels !" technique for distraction from the movie "Up". Now let's get back to bashing our villain du jour, Catherine Blakespear, shall we.
"Squirrel" nothing.
DeleteCome back when you have evidence he wasn't under the influence.
Or at least a coherent theory of why a guy gets pulled over totally sober in a bar district, flees the cops to get out of a stop sign ticket, and then drives the wrong way on the freeway.
Sounds totally sober to me!
Coherent theory #1 Warrants
DeleteCoherent theory # 2 He panicked because of a warrant
Coherent theory # 3 Drugs
So... It's a Bar District now. Do I have that right? I didn't know that Swami's, Hansen's Swami's Café and the java Hut were bars.
Hmmmm... Very enlightening.
Namaste EU!
Wait but you (or your fellow DUI-deniers) used the lack of DUI charges being filed as evidence there was no DUI.
DeleteThe same logic would mean there were no warrants and no drugs.
8:57- I have no idea if this person was intoxicated or not. However, I do know that booze often leaves a person impaired in their judgement. The way the person alluded the sheriff makes me wonder why? If he wasn't drunk, what did he have in the car that he didn't want the sheriff to see. Going the wrong way on a freeway is pretty scary for both he driver and for others driving.
ReplyDelete7:25, Its just that authorities usually pull out all the stops in the beginning when there is an arrest. They diminish from that point as a rule.
ReplyDeleteEU 3:16 says:
ReplyDelete"Come back when you have evidence he wasn't under the influence."
(sigh)
Okay. Maybe he was drunk. Then again, maybe not. The evidence: (1) he drove past a bar; (2) he had bad judgement.
You have to admit, that's some weak sauce right there.
And now EU declares that his pet theory is the default--that the burden of proof is on others to prove a negative.
Hey EU. Prove that you don't beat your wife. Until you can prove that, we should all assume that you do.
WRONG.
DeleteGiven the circumstances, DUI is the overwhelmingly most probable scenario.
If you have a better idea, I'd love to hear it.
You conveniently neglect to mention that he not only started his adventure at the same time & place the Union anniversary party was winding down, but also drove the wrong way on the freeway!
What does the NTSB say about wrong way drivers (in fatal collisions, which reasonable people could see as a fair proxy for freeway wrong way drivers)?
The majority are drunk. And if you exclude the confused elderly (which our 43-year-old soccer coach is not), the overwhelming majority are drunk.
http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SIR1201.pdf
Anyone with a lick of common sense knows that under these circumstances, it is highly probable that the guy was DUI. So what's your point? You want to continue arguing in the absence of any evidence that it's just a guy who drove the wrong way on the freeway because he felt like being nonconformist? Good luck with that.
It's the 101, all kinds of people drive it at all times of day.
DeleteI drive past there sober all the time, and I've rolled a few stop signs and blown through pink traffic lights (almost red) without a wisp of alcohol on my breath.
There are regular AA meetings near that route, too. Some of them let out at about 9PM.
And I presume you fled a traffic stop and drove the wrong way on I-5 immediately thereafter?
Delete"Given the circumstances, DUI is the overwhelmingly most probable scenario."
DeleteDUI would be probable, but a test for intoxication would be instant and of course part of the suspect's charges. Name one other similar case where a DUI was not part of the suspect's charges and I'll give your "overwhelming" probability some space.
EU, it's about time you pull your head out. You insinuated, on pure speculation, this guy's insanely reckless behavior was somehow connected with Union's anniversary event. There is zero evidence the guy was at Union, or drinking anywhere else in Encinitas, even if he was drunk (which is also conjecture.) Perhaps he was having a few pops in a local park.... Maybe he was drinking at a restaurant in Carlsbad.... Maybe he was drinking at home. Maybe he wasn't drinking at all but was high on painkillers. We could speculate all day but doing so is just dumb... and to bash any local business based on these facts is in itself reckless. As pointed out above, this blog has lost all credibility and reeks of bitterness. Keep crying wolf and nobody will pay attention when/if Union or other local watering holes really screw up.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry you've had a disappointing experience.
DeleteI hope you find another blog that will better suit your needs.
WC,
ReplyDeleteSorry, the point about the Union in relation to this arrest is fair. Unless there is direct evidence that said suspect was drinking there, it's not really a fair take unless you mention every other alcohol serving establishment downtown and beyond.
Drinking and driving is at its core a question of personal responsibility, ie the driver's responsibility not to take the wheel. Establishments that serve also bear some responsibility, but having worked in bars and restaurants, there are many ways for people to get a drink.
The answer is still in our hands to a degree, and that is enforcement. Sounds like the cops did their jobs on this one.
I think you and I are in agreement that there is too much bad behavior related to drinking downtown. My personal solution is to not go there. My universal solution is more cops nailing DUI suspects. Word gets around. It worked in C-bad, it can work here. And the bars need to be onboard, but they probably won't be.
-MGJ
Thanks MGJ,
DeleteI was just pointing out a funny coincidence until a couple commenters decided to make a big deal out of it.
I agree he could have been drinking anywhere downtown.
That said, Union is regularly cited by downtown residents as one of the worst offenders for drunken customers disturbing the neighborhood.
DeleteHave a cop stationed outside the place at closing time - watch the patrons scatter.
Delete7:38, better yet, have an actor cop sit out there. Did you know we're already paying $28,000,000 per year to law enforcement here in Encinitas? No. All you know is that we paid $10,000,000 for PV forever.
DeleteOK, 7:38, maybe not you. But maybe you catch my drift.
DeleteWC,
ReplyDeleteSorry, hard to go the humor route when DUI's are involved. Agree that the Union by volume alone must be one of the worst offenders. More cops are the solution.
It would be nice if there was more will on the council, but councils rarely go up against the business class, so no surprise there
-MGJ
Let's see. What could account for a 43 year old man driving a vehicle, ( and just for the sake of argument, is not on his 3rd strike) have in the car that would warrant driving the wrong way on a freeway. It's one thing to run a sign or two. I think most of us would call that the California Stop. However, it gets a little dicier when the person behind the wheel decides for reasons, he only knows, to go the wrong way on the freeway. Hypotheses: 1) Drunk, from who cares where; 2) Drugs openly displayed in car so sheriff would see them ( so they were probably not in the trunk); 3) Open bottle also where sheriff could see it; 4) wanted for something else and just happens to get busted on this; and lastly the person just wanted a little adventure in his life. Maybe he was bored going the correct way on the freeway? I would say it could be any option except the last one. I cannot think of any others. Can any of you? We will be able to read the sheriff's report if we ask for it. I don't know how long it takes to get it, but someone might want out and let us know. The problem is that the only thing we would find is the drinking issue. If he had drugs, they would be long gone. If he had other violations, perhaps not.
DeleteFrom my chair, the point isn't if he was drunk or not. maybe he was maybe he wasn't. Time will tell.
DeleteThe point is whether it is wise editorial policy to insinuate a specific crime by an individual, and possibly a business with absolutely squat for real evidence.
--FP.
The man is British. Not that it excuses him, but it provides another nuance to the story.
Delete3:02, Your sake of argument is faulty. It's felons on their 2nd strike who resort to anything to not get a third. People on their 3rd strike aren't usually out and about. Bottom line, desperate people run from the cops. To speculate why they do, would take volumes of scenarios. Let's just wait and see what the suspect's "excuse" is. There are plenty of idiots around who don't need alcohol to make terrible choices.
Delete10:54, Brit? No wonder he was sober driving on the wrong side of the freeway.
ReplyDelete