Hey, there! Log in / Register
Two gang members arrested for Chiara Levin murder
By adamg on Sat, 04/28/2007 - 5:04pm
An "armed career criminal" and another alleged gang member will be arraigned Monday on charges they killed Chiara Levin on March 24 during a shootout, prosecutors said today.
Levin, visiting from Kentucky, was shot in the head during an early morning shootout between Casimiro Barros, the alleged career criminal from Roxbury at just 21 and Manuel Andrade, 34, of Dorchester, according to Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel Conley. In a statement, Conley described the night of her death:
Chiara Levin was with two friends at the Caprice Lounge on Tremont Street in Boston. There she and her friends met Manuel Andrade and two other men. Levin and her friends went with Andrade and his associates to an after-hours party at 415 Geneva Avenue in Dorchester. Levin and her friends drove there in a Cadillac Escalade with Andrade and the other men. The facts also establish that Andrade carried with him a loaded handgun.
This after-hours party at 415 Geneva Avenue was very crowded. At some point during this party, Manuel Andrade got into an altercation and shot an individual inside the party. Andrade returned to the Escalade, which was parked on the corner of Westville Street and Geneva Avenue, where Levin, her friends and Andrade's friends were waiting inside the vehicle.
Standing next to the Escalade, Andrade now exchanged gunfire with Casimiro Barros who was standing in front of 415 Geneva Ave. During the exchange of gunfire, Chiara Levin was struck in the head by a single bullet and was pronounced dead early that same morning at Boston Medical Center where she and her friends had been taken.
Barros is no stranger to police. On Dec. 14, 2006, he briefly led police on a high-speed chase. When they caught up with him, they say they discovered a gun in the car and arrested him on a variety of charges, including unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition and being being an armed career criminal.
On April 4, 2006, he and a companion were stopped by police. His companion was arrested for unlawful possession of a loaded hangun; Barros was arrested on a charge of being a disorderly person.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
How awful!!
Sorry to hear that Chiara Levin was killed--unlucky enough to get caught in the cross-gun-fire of people in a dispute that turned lethal due to the presence of handguns. It's horrible enough when people are so angry and out of control that they totally disregard who gets in the way, or who gets hurt or killed, but the fact that guns were present, as I said before, not only turned a dispute into a deadly situation, but it underscores the need for strong gun control in this country at large.
While I realize that the gun lobby and the NRA are too powerful and too well-organized for a total ban of handguns to be realistically possible, I believe that stronger gun laws are necessary. The mayor has attempted to implement stronger gun laws and control, but the trouble is that illegal guns flow into Massachusetts from neighborhing New Hampshire, where firearms are legal, thus presenting a real problem by undermining such efforts by Menino and other Massachusetts officials to implement stronger and more affective gun laws.
That being said, I wish that they'd work to stop the flow of illegal weapons here into Massachusetts. If there were stronger gun control laws and no handguns present, Chiara Levin would be alive right now.
?
but the trouble is that illegal guns flow into Massachusetts from neighborhing New Hampshire
Did you get this "fact" from the Department of Pulling Random Stuff Out of Your Ass (DPRSOYA)?
A 2000 ATF report on gun trafficking in Boston shows that Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine are not the major sources of illegal guns. Instead, it is Alabama, Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida that are the main sources. Nearly half of the illegal guns used in crimes in Boston in 2000 came from Massachusetts.
If there were stronger gun control laws and no handguns present, Chiara Levin would be alive right now.
And if magical unicorns were prancing about farting rainbows out of their asses we'd all live in a land of lollipops and puppies.
Since Massachusetts enacted its "strictest" gun laws in the nation" violent firearms crime has gone up about 60%.
There are currently over 20,000 firearms laws on the books. Enacting more won't solve the problem. Locking up criminals will. Did you notice that one of the shooters had previously been caught with an illegal firearm? Why the hell was he not in jail?
Anyway, thanks for your post. I was hoping to someday meet the dumbest person on the internet and now I have. Seriously, thank you.
Message to Weebs--Shame on your attitude.
It looks like I've just met the biggest jerk I've ever met online--you. Look, buddy, you're entitled to your opinion, but your insults are disgusting and unnecessary. To be honest with you, I think that you're offensively judgemental....and....I will not be responding to your posts in the future. Shame on your attitude! It's people with attitudes like yours who've been responsible for more people getting killed in gun violence.
Attitudinal double-standards
"looks like I've just met the biggest jerk....your insults are disgusting and unnecessary....you're offensively judgemental...Shame on your attitude!"
Sounds like a "non-judgmental" liberal. That is, one who judges others for judging others. Might be a feminist, too, since they, too, pretend to want disccussion, other "voices," "diversity" of opinion, etc....then run away whenever anyone disagrees.
Apparently she'd rather people use bullets than words.
The problem at hand isn't handguns. It's people who use them. How do people exit the womb and then end up killing others over disputes? THAT's the unanswered question.
Don't ban cars because some people drive drunk.
Hey listen there, buddy.
Let it be known that it's not the disagreements over opinions that 's an issue for me, it's the insulting attitude that people like you, BrucemB, and Weebs take when somebody differs with them. I'm perfectly willing to debate with people who have different opinions than I do--not necessarily and always for the purpose of changing his/her mind, but to at least make myself heard, and to hear what other people have to say.
As I've pointed out before, a gun is designed to kill people, and more often than not, it does. With rare exceptions, the majority of homicides are crimes of passion, whether premeditated or not, that occur among people who know each other, and, with handguns present, they're even more likely to happen. Granted, as has been pointed out before, a person who really wants to murder someone could beat, bludgeon, stab or strangle his/her victim to death. However, the chances of survival and/or full recovery from a stab wound or whatever are sometimes a little better, depending on the intensity and/or dept of the stabbing. With a gun, however, it's all too easy to kill or maim someone immediately in a state of heated rage during an argument, which happens too many times, even among average, ordinary citizens.
Also, there was a horrific case up in Vermont, where a 13-year-old boy, who was the constant victim of cyberbullying, followed a cyberbully's suggestion to "kill himself", which, very tragically, the young boy did, with his father's gun that was kept around the house. Had the boy's father not kept the gun around the house, and had the boy gotten parental supervision while posting on the internet, the kid would be alive right now.
In the meantime, the boy's father has lobbied for some anti-cyberbullying legislation for the state of Vermont. Secondly, the father left his gun out where the kid could get to it, unlocked, and loaded.
if there were no handguns
if there were no handguns present, then ms Levin would be alive, that is true. but unfortunately, a armed criminal would not adhere to your handgun ban. the store owner or person protecting themself from the armed criminal would also be dead, because he would follow the law and turn in his gun. i am not a gun nut at all, but i do believe in protecting your business, home, family etc. a handgun ban would only affect the lawful, non-criminal element and would give the armed robber/rapist/murderer free reign.
Gunproofing Children
Sure, store owners do occasionally fend off armed assailants. They also get shot with their own guns, shoot their selves/wives/husbands/children/friends with their guns. They also have to explain why their kid or their clerk used that gun to commit suicide, or why they had a loaded gun where their young child could reach it and shoot themself/their friend/other family member.
If any of you shahpshootahs can explain to me how Canada has legal hunting weapons and the occasional massacre like the US, but does not appear to have the urban gun crime problem without factoring in their different gun control laws in your explanation, I think it would be interesting.
Demographics is probably the
Demographics is probably the biggest reason for the difference.
Elaborate, please?
Demographcs. Right. Vastly fewer Canadians own handguns is a big one.
Care to explain? I work with demographic information for a living - you need to be more specific here about which "demographics" you mean and make your case.
Race.
Race.
This kind of thing's clearly not limited to urban areas,
given what happened in Columbine, and other high schools.
I respectfully disagree with you, notcharles. Here's why:
First of all, as I've said before, the illegal flow of weapons from neighboring New Hampshire into Massachusetts present a real problem. Legislators up in NH should make a serious, all-out effort to stop that. Secondly, very few handguns, if any, are used in self-defense. Mostly, they're used to kill another person, which, more often than not, does happen.
Also, the fact that the Gun Lobby/NRA has rejected the most simple measures, such as background checks, waiting periods, and the requirement of gun manufacturers to install safety locks on guns to prevent unauthorized use of the firearm in the event that it's lost or stolen and so that kids can't get access to it and use it that're necessary to ensure some sort of gun control and safety, is also quite dangerous and has helped produce disaastrous results. People who have a history of being a felon, mental illness, and substance/alcohol abuse and alcoholism, for instance, are people who really shouldn't have access to firearms at all, and, because of the laxness in implementing and enforcing gun laws, criminals and people with a history of mental illness/substance abuse have been able to get access to firearms.
Come to think of it, I know a guy my own age who lives in a rural town roughly an hour west of Boston, and lives in Florida for six months of the year. He's an ordinary private citizen, who, to my knowledge, has never served in the mililtary, or any other branch of the services. He owns a guns so that he can shoot beavers in his back yard, and...he has a fairly long history of alcoholism. Given this particular guy's history of alcoholism, the fact that he was able to get access to firearms at all boggles my mind.
The guys that got into the dispute which resulted in Chiara Levin's untimely and horrible death both had histories of being career criminals. The presence of handguns caused the dispute that they had to turn deadly.
Most people who get murdered are murdered by people they know, be they friends, neighbors, acquaintences and even family members. Most murders also occur in the home, in barroom brawls, and on street corners. While it's true that a person who's really hell-bent on murder could beat, bludgeon, stab or strangle his victim to death, the advent of handguns makes murder much, much easier....and much more likely, to boot. All it takes is the squeeze of the trigger and the crack of a pistol and a life is abruptly ended or irrevocably altered as a consequence.
To go by the adage: An angry person with no gun is just angry, while an angry person with a gun shoots his/her neighbor, friend, family member, etc. All too often, the presence of handguns has made volatile situations much, much worse. Disputes among friends, acquaintences, family members, etc, often turn deadly, and, like the recent Virginia Tech shooting, the Columbine High School shooting, not to mention countless of other incidents like those and simple disputes between neighbors, etc., confrontations have been made much, much worse due to the presence of handguns.
Double Standard
I find it sad that there is such a double standard when it comes to murders in Boston. It is a shame that it had to take a "white" woman for the Boston police to actually act and do something for once. I live in Dorchester and I witness things like this at least once or twice a week. However when it is a woman of color or any other ethnicity, almost nothing is done. In the past few months a 19 year old girl was shot and killed in front of an elementary school that is a 2 minute walk from my house. The killer was never found and its like her story vanished after that. I never saw anything on the news about her or the case after that, and to be honest it was sickening. Yet when a white visitor from another state is gunned down, the mayor and the police force suddenly feel the need to actually come out in full force.
Another example was when a young man (Gui Rodrigues)that I knew was kidnapped on April 1, 2006 and his body was found April 7th, 2006. During the time in between his dissapearance and when his body was found, there was almost if any at all no news about him or the search that the Boston Police SHOULD have been doing for him. Yet when a young white girl suddenly goes missing during her work break for a massive search is initiated. She wasnt even legally missing because it hadnt been 24 hours, but the police did their job and found her.
Please note that even though this rant may sound cold, I am happy that they are doing something about poor Chiara Levin and her family, however I just wish that everybody who's family has to go through what Chiara's did, gets the same treatment. Race shouldn't matter and the fact that many of these people live in the ghetto or are affiliated with gangs, shouldn't have an effect on the effort that is given by the Boston Police or any police force in general.
A double standard does, unquestionably exist,
when it comes to solving murders and bringing their perpetrators to justice, if that happens at all. It's wholeheartedly agreed, AJ. F, that there really is no excuse for this double standard, plus it's pathetic, to boot.
All that being said, I, too, agree that race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and demographics really shouldn't matter, that the treatment and justice should be equal.
if you witness this sort of
if you witness this sort of thing once or twice a week what are you doing about it? do you ever "snitch"?were you on here several weeks ago asking the same race realted question regarding ms levin?it is people like YOU that divide this city.
So...
All Massachusetts needs to do to rid the streets of gang violence, in your expert opinion, is get its neighboring states to adopt Massachusetts-style gun control laws?
(pausing to laugh at the sheer ignorance, stupidity and naivete behind such a notion)
I have yet to hear someone make that argument, in support of Mayor Menino's anti-gun rights agenda, who actually understands the first thing about what it's like to be a lawful gun owner in the City of Boston.
Here's your homework assignment:
Describe the steps that a single, working, mother of three in Dorchester, must go through in an attempt to get licensed to own a handgun. Include all the costs associated therewith, in terms of both money and time.
Now repeat the exercise, only this time, instesad of a sinlge, working mom, make it a wealthy, politically-connected white man.
Aaaahhh...I can just smell the socio-economic justice and racial equality in the air. Can't you?
Oh, please, BrucemB:
"Describe the steps that a single, working, mother of three in Dorchester, must go through in an attempt to get licensed to own a handgun. Include all the costs associated therewith, in terms of both money and time."
"Now repeat the exercise, only this time, instesad of a sinlge, working mom, make it a wealthy, politically-connected white man."
"Aaaahhh...I can just smell the socio-economic justice and racial equality in the air. Can't you?"
Oh, please, BrucemB......you don't sound like such a bastion of tolerance yourself, and yet you're the one talking about inequality and justice here.....?
More of your "facts," huh?
First of all, as I've said before, the illegal flow of weapons from neighboring New Hampshire into Massachusetts present a real problem.
OK, I already posted that the 2000 ATF study showed that illegal guns are NOT flowing in from NH, but you went ahead and repeated it once again. Sigh. Are you just going to keep repeating that, or will you listen to facts?
Secondly, very few handguns, if any, are used in self-defense.
The US Department of Justice estimates that handguns are used in self-defense 82,500 times per year on average. Source here: DOJ
Mostly, they're used to kill another person, which, more often than not, does happen.
You have any stats that handguns are used "mostly" to kill other people? I'd be interested in seeing them since NONE of my handguns have ever killed other people.
Also, the fact that the Gun Lobby/NRA has rejected the most simple measures, such as background checks, waiting periods, and the requirement of gun manufacturers to install safety locks on guns to prevent unauthorized use of the firearm in the event that it's lost or stolen and so that kids can't get access to it and use it that're necessary to ensure some sort of gun control and safety, is also quite dangerous and has helped produce disaastrous results.
Really? The NRA is against background checks? You might want to check into that yourself, cause you're wrong. In fact, the NRA supports recent measures to strengthen the NICS system. But once again, why let facts get in the way of your feelgood post, right?
Why don't you go ahead and admit that you don't know squat about guns? Seriously, just admit that you're pulling "facts" out of your ass and we're call it a day.
Did you even read the rest of Adam's post
This scumbag, Barros, should have been in prison. Liberalism, of the "let's just give this poor, misunderstood victim of society eight more chances" variety, killed Ms. Levin.
This "dispute that turned lethal" never even should have taken place, and wouldn't have if this "armed career criminal" was dealt with appropriately.
Liberals like you and Menino are more concerned with taking away the rights of non-criminals than you are with removing criminals from the streets of our cities and towns.
"If there were stronger gun control laws and no handguns present, Chiara Levin would be alive right now."
And, IF I coudl crap gold bars, I'd be rich.
Ah--Ahem!!
First of all, BrucemB, you're definitely another person who needs to learn to disagree with people in a respectful manner, without resorting to the kind of insults that you've been resorting to in your replies to my posts, which give a different opinion than yours when it comes to guns and gun control.
While I agree that this thug really does belong behind bars, this does not change the fact is that gun ownership by an average, ordinary run of the mill private citizen, regardless of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and demographic location does not make a city, town and/or society at large any safer.
As I've pointed out before, all too often, the Gun Lobby has deliberately stymied and thwarted efforts to strengthen existing gun laws and pass more stringent ones to prevent people who really and truly have no business getting access to firearms. Unfortunately, as yet another poster here on UniversalHub has correctly put it, far, far too many law-abiding citizens who own guns end up getting shot with their own pistols, and people end up being maimed or killed because a dispute over simple matters was rendered deadly due to the presence of guns, resulting in either a murder, a suicide, or both.
If Ms Levin had remained in
If Ms Levin had remained in KY she would be alive right now. Your city is unsafe because you have too many thugs. Lock them up. Enforce your laws.
Kentucky
Yes, because nobody ever gets murdered in Kentucky.
Nope, no murder here.
Perfectly safe.
Yes, indeed.
Railroad killer? Never heard of him.
What's wanton murder?.
dont forget about the school
dont forget about the school shooting that started it all
Oh yeah.....Right!!
pfft!
MS.Levin would of still been
MS.Levin would of still been alive today if she did'nt get into a car with a bunch of so called "thugs" she just met.I'am sorry about the way she died but did'nt her mother teach her not to get in cars with strangers.I live in Boston and I admit it has it's problems but I also have common sense.
spend a night in roxbury
are you serious going to hold the nra responsible for this your clearly some political jack ass who has probly never spent one night on the mean streets of roxbury where if u dont have your gun your liable to be robbed and killed .......I myslef have been through a life of crime and and the penal system and i have learned the right from wrong and i am now working to get my life on track ive seen things from all sides and i personally hold the boston police and the legal team of the courts responsible not to mention how much discrimination we as cape verdean people have to deal with because of the media portraing all of us as thugs and c.v gangmembers. all you people who blame rap music and cape verdeans ect for all the gang activities are probly rich and wealthy uppity's who have never had to sit through a court trial for your life knowingly innocent but forced through persecution because you had to grow up in a rough neighborhood and not to mention your cape verdean
Sorry that you had to go through all you went through,
however, I don't appreciate being called a "political jackass' for having a different opinion(s) than you regarding handguns and gun control. Imo, the fact that the crime rate is as high where you live, not to mention many other places here in the United States has been made far, far worse by the presence of handguns.
Handguns owned by the average, ordinary private citizens who claim that the Constitution's 2nd Amendment on the Right to Bear Arms are sadly mistaken if they think that it applies to them. The fact is, that this Amendment only applies to security personnel, law-enforcement personnel such as police, secret service people, and soldiers who're serving in our military (what a well-organized militia is, under the Constitution). The average, ordinary private citizen doesn't have the proper training and education for the use of guns, which is why the indiscriminate ownership and use of guns presents such a dangerous situation.
I'm no gun nut
I'm actually one of those people who wish the Second Amendment did only apply to "well regulated militias," but you're just wrong here. This isn't Canada.
I'm not so sure about that, adamg.
From what I understand, the Constitution's 2nd Amendment was/is only suppose to apply to "well-regulated militias". There are all kinds of people trying to tamper with the Constitution and twist it to meet their own interpretations of it, especially right now, when our Constitution is being ripped to shreds by our present Administration.
Nice straw man
I spend most EVERY night in Roxbury. I don't own a gun and don't ever intend to. I've never felt unsafe in the neighborhood.
Violence is a problem, yes, and it's a societal problem that goes beyond blaming individuals, but you can't just say that someone living in a particular ZIP code is automatically going to be forced to become involved in violence, because that's simply not true.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Statement from Chiara Levin's family on the arrests
Here.