Oak Park and River Forest police reports - July 10-15

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

By Jean Lotus

Forest Park Review Editor


Two Chicago men, whom police determined were responsible for several burglaries to cars in River Forest, were arrested July 10 and charged with burglary after being caught with a wallet that had allegedly been removed from a vehicle in the 800 block of William Street.

A 57-year-old Forest Park man was arrested and charged with theft in the 100 block of South Blvd., the morning of July 13.

A 25-year-old Palatine man was charged with allegedly stealing two bottles of vodka and two steaks by stuffing them into his pants pockets at the Dominick's on Lake St., the evening of July 13.

Carlos Morales, 40, of Berwyn was arrested July 14 in the 700 block of North Blvd. around 3:40 a.m. after police found him to be non-compliant in registering as a sex offender. Morales was convicted of criminal sexual assault of a 21-year-old in the early 1990s when he was 22.

A 26-year-old Chicago man was charged with theft after allegedly snatching a cellphone from an Oak Park juvenile in the 1000 block of N. Euclid on July 14 around 2 p.m.

Fleeing forger disrupts bank

An 18-year-old Chicago man was charged with attempting to cash a fraudulent check at the TCF bank, 800 Harlem Ave. on July 12 around noon. When the man observed arriving River Forest police, he reportedly attempted to flee by jumping onto desks and climbing over cubicles in an attempt to exit the bank. He was subdued with a struggle and taken into custody. He was charged with Class 3 Forgery, possession of a stolen check, criminal damage to property and resisting arrest.


A River Forest residence in the first block of Franklin was burglarized, the evening of July 10. Persons unknown forced open a back door and removed a Nintendo DSA, a child's wallet and Italian train ticket stubs.

Calvary Church in the 900 block of Lake Street was burglarized, overnight July 13, after access was gained by unknown means. Once inside, someone broke office windows and ransacked offices stealing $300 and microphones.

Three sets of child-sized tennis shoes and a skateboard were stolen from a porch in the 400 block of S. Harvey, the afternoon of July 12. Estimated loss was $250.

A home in the 1000 block of S. Grove was entered by means of an unlocked rear door around noon on July 15. Once inside, someone ransacked the interior and removed gift cards, coins and jewelry valued at $190.

Garbage cans set ablaze

Police reported two alley garbage cans on fire in the 1000 block of N. Humphrey and the 200 block of LeMoyne around 11 p.m. on July 14. Three male juveniles, 10-12 years old, were observed fleeing from the alley.

Bicycle thefts

A locked 24-inch Magna touring 21-speed bicycle was stolen from Oak Park and River Forest High School's bike rack, overnight July 12.

A locked woman's silver Trek Multi Track bike was also stolen there the evening of July 13.

A locked, grey single speed cruiser bike was stolen from Ridgeland and Lake during the day on July 13.

Two black Canondale bicycles worth $1,038 were stolen from a garage via an open overhead door in the 100 block of Bishop Quarter Lane, overnight July 7.

An unlocked green and black 10-inch Chaos bike was stolen from a front lawn in the 900 block of S. Kenilworth, June 26-28.

These items, obtained from the Oak Park and River Forest police departments, came from reports filed July 10-15 and represent a portion of the incidents to which police responded. Anyone named in these reports has only been charged with a crime and cases have not yet been adjudicated.

Reader Comments

28 Comments - Add Your Comment

Note: This page requires you to login with Facebook to comment.

Comment Policy


Posted: July 27th, 2012 9:30 PM

UK, India, Japan have hardly any gun deaths. It is possible


Posted: July 27th, 2012 8:22 PM

Russ, for clarity sake are you saying that without guns all the suicides would have been successful and that the "thugs shooting other thugs" would have found another way to kill each other? How many lives would legislation have to save to be worthwhile?

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: July 27th, 2012 1:59 PM

Cont... Open areas for possible hits would be face, neck, lower stomach, ass, knees, ankles, feet if he was fully geared in protective gear. All a very tough shot to make with a moving target. The best would have been asking why is someone coming in to a movie theater with a rifle, and stopping the person at the door.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: July 27th, 2012 1:55 PM

Real Life, the shoot back and he will run may or may not work with a drive by shooter, but you are talking about someone he can not rationalize. That means he would not rationalize he would be hurt or killed if someone was shooting back. As for a leg or other open areas of the shooter, that would be a chance hit. In that case, it would have taken returning fire power greater than he was delivering to land a possible hit if the shooter was not standing still or moving very slowly. Cont...

Real Life from Oak Park  

Posted: July 27th, 2012 1:31 PM

O.K. These "shooters are almost always profiled as "cowards" one shot and he would have run like a little girl! P.s. go for head and legs then..His Armor would not have saved him!


Posted: July 27th, 2012 12:54 PM

Meant to also add that a very small number of gun deaths are "preventable". Basically, nothing anyone can do about 90% of gun deaths and the solutions have nothing to do with gun laws. More to do with a large percentage of the population affected having messed up culture of violence. There will always be some crazed loner going on shooting spree or blowing themselves up.


Posted: July 27th, 2012 12:50 PM

Half of all gun deaths are suicides. The remaining 40% are in all likelihood thugs shooting other thugs with already illegally obtained firearms. The problem is gun laws don't and won't stop violence. Never have. These types of events are tragic, but no amount of laws will stop a crazed whack job.


Posted: July 27th, 2012 12:39 PM

Dan, I agree that we'll never stop all violence. That clearly isn't a reason to not reduce violence and killing when we can. I didn't address a "gun culture". I'm not a pacifist and I don't want all the guns. Lots of people own and use guns responsibly. But that doesn't mean there should be unrestricted accessibility to weapons. Is it your position that there should be no limits to the guns, ammunition, etc. a person can buy? Are background checks ok? How about a waiting period? Registration?

Dan in Oak Park  

Posted: July 25th, 2012 10:41 PM

misdirection, what is sensible and rational? A killer in a theater with a one shot musket is a bad guy, but give him an automatic with a 100 round magazine and our gun culture is to blame. You cannot stop violent behavior regardless of the weapon used.


Posted: July 25th, 2012 4:46 PM

AMEN. Put the guns away for good. You will thank me in 20 years.


Posted: July 25th, 2012 10:57 AM

Dan, your statement is obviously true. That's not an argument against sensible gun laws, though. I don't know if it's meant to be. It would have been more difficult for someone to go into a theater and do that kind of damage without gun. It would also be more difficult to have a drive-by with a knife. Again, I'm not saying we have to get rid of all the guns. But we need a real conversation and to accept the possibility of some rational limits.

Dan in Oak Park  

Posted: July 25th, 2012 7:47 AM

Take away the guns and we will be reading about people hacked to death with knives and swords or blown up with bombs. Bad people will always do bad things and no one can prevent it from happening.


Posted: July 24th, 2012 9:29 PM

ALL GUNS WERE LEGAL AT SOME POINT. If you cant play nice with the other kids, you cant play at all. The same would go for gun owners, both good and bad. If good guns get into the hands of bad people, then no one can have any guns. PERIOD

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: July 24th, 2012 8:46 PM

To Russ, a Soldier would have know to drop, and move into an area to gain a clear shot, but not everyone has had that training, and not every Soldier carries a weapon were he is suppose to be free from this insanity.

To Russ  

Posted: July 24th, 2012 7:08 PM

There are unquestionably examples of times when an armed person stops or prevents a crime. But I've got to call BS on the idea that an armed movie patron firing back in a dark movie theater with some type of tear gas already released in the air would have likely reduced the carnage. No sale. This was a heinous criminal act. But it's just crazy to pretend that everytime a gun is used criminally that an armed bystander would have reduced the casualties.


Posted: July 24th, 2012 7:00 PM

then that's your business. When someone owns a gun and handles it irresponsibly or criminally or brings it out in public where my family may be then you have made it my business. I know many responsible gun owners. They don't have automatic weapons with 100 round magazines. There is a point where it's all just too much. People that won't admit that and cling to their "Guns don't kill people" mantra forfeit their credibility are difficult to take seriously.


Posted: July 24th, 2012 6:48 PM

Keep it real, all due respect but that argument is out of place. The guns used in the theater killings were legal and legally obtained. The crime was not committed by a "gangbanger". Gun safety wouldn't have saved anyone in the theater. Stricter gun laws may not have prevented it either, but it would have made it more difficult. There are limitations to the rights afforded us in the Constitution, including the right to bear arms. If you want a gun at home and keep it locked in a gun safe (cont)

Keep it real  

Posted: July 24th, 2012 3:54 PM

@GUNZ KILL, how bout if you take time out to get the number of murders at the hands of people with legal guns vs the number of murders by gangbangers and thugs that dont have legal weapons. how about you stop crying about how bad guns are and focus gun safety.


Posted: July 24th, 2012 1:56 PM

More people with more guns?!? Your kidding right. There are 12 guns sold a minute, every minute of every day. There are 283 Million privately owned guns and 4 out of 10 households own at least 1 gun. Guns DONT stop violence, they cause and promote more.


Posted: July 24th, 2012 11:53 AM

Someone with a gun in the theatre would have probably reduced the carnage. The nut jobs know the odds of someone firing back are slim. Body armor doesn't necessarily stop all shots. The force of the bullet impact will still knock the vast majority of people off their feet. Just last week there was a 70 yr old packing heat in FL who stopped two armed robbers at a cafe. Google it. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48233126/ns/local_news-miami_fl/t/elderly-man-shoots-armed-robbers-internet-caf


Posted: July 24th, 2012 9:42 AM

There may have been more killed if someone had a concealed gun in the theatre. If you did not read the report, the James Holmes was in full body armor. Someone could have shot at him, but the bullets would not have penetrated the body armor. Guns have a purpose, but there needs to be limits. If there are no limits, I should then be able to drive around with a machine gun mounted to the roof of my SUV.

What if?  

Posted: July 24th, 2012 9:15 AM

Done, I would bet the 12 dead and 59 injured would have preferred to have someone with a gun on their side in the theater that day.


Posted: July 24th, 2012 12:10 AM

Guns will never be the solution to gun violence. The guy was wearing body armor and had 3 guns. He had an M-16 style gun with 100's of bullets. Not a chance.

Done from Oak Park  

Posted: July 23rd, 2012 4:44 PM

"What if someone at the theater was packing? They could have stopped that loser before he got started. Concealed Carry is a must!" And this would be so that two people (or more) could be shooting at each other? I'll guess that the toll would be more than 12 dead and 59 hurt in this scenario.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: July 23rd, 2012 2:27 PM

Cont... Obama made a trip to there to show how bad he felt about this. Will he know ban assault weapons? President's do have the power to do that if they really wanted. Removing and stopping the manufacturing of gun's would be the answer to gun violence but that is not going to happen. In the old day's, if something like this happened, it would have been summed up very easy without a bunch of agencies. Some crazy person went into a theater and started shooting. As for why, the answer is Cont...

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: July 23rd, 2012 2:24 PM

I didn't know who or what posting it would be on, but here it is. First I have to ask, if every State has conceal carry, why wasn't anyone packing heat? Of course all law agencies need to jump onto this because it keeps everyone busy, and people can think now that maybe we need security gates to all events. Was this a terrorist attack from some abroad terrorist group? Is this something that says maybe there should not be anymore movies other then G rated movies made? Cont...

What if?  

Posted: July 23rd, 2012 1:59 PM

What if someone at the theater was packing? They could have stopped that loser before he got started. Concealed Carry is a must!


Posted: July 23rd, 2012 1:56 PM

The Colorado gunman bought all of his weapons just months before his rampage. He also bought all of them legally with out there being any questions. This is why ALL guns must go!!! Look back at all of the mass killings in our world. None of them could be accomplished with out guns. Pathetic.

Facebook Connect

Answer Book 2017

To view the full print edition of the Wednesday Journal 2017 Answer Book, please click here.

Quick Links

Sign-up to get the latest news updates for Oak Park and River Forest.

MultimediaContact us
Submit Letter To The Editor
Place a Classified Ad