Friday, September 01, 2017

Ride Share Driver Pulled Gun On Boystown Couple, Cops Say

A ride share driver is facing charges after she allegedly pulled a handgun on two passengers during an argument in the 400 block of West Melrose early Friday.

A Boystown couple took a picture of the driver with her gun and called police at 2:03 a.m., a CPD spokesperson said.

Cops caught up with the car at Addison and Broadway moments later.

25-year-old Jaleesa Rance of Aurora is charged with two misdemeanor counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and one misdemeanor count of unlawful use of a weapon on a public street. A handgun was recovered from her vehicle, according to police.

Rance was identified by the two men, ages 31 and 26, police said.
----------
Email      Facebook       Twitter       YouTube

24 comments:

  1. I would like to know what led up to the gun being pulled. Sounds entertaining

    ReplyDelete
  2. Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and unlawful use of a weapon on a public street are MISDEMEANORS?!?! Huh? No wonder the criminals aren't afraid to commit crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. But don't forget that Uber and Lyft refuse and don't want to cooperate that their drivers should be forced to have fingerprint criminal backgrounds because it would be racial discrimination!!!! Only in America, that Uber and Lyft would rather have criminals drive their customers around then be alleged to discriminate. what a country we live in 2017!

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/uber-and-lyfts-arguments-against-fingerprinting-make-little-sense/2017/01/02/a0926aae-ce1b-11e6-b8a2-8c2a61b0436f_story.html?utm_term=.1beef0f0f48b

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How would fingerprinting have helped? Was she driving under a fake name?

      Delete
    2. That's for the judge to decide, without knowing the whole story it's sencless to speculate and comment

      Delete
  4. Alright, there must be a reason for her to pull the gun. Were they threatening her? There's always two sides.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about because she is a criminal?

      Delete
  5. She finally got tired and snapped - too many people leaving messes in her car, spilling their beer, vomiting, lighting up a cigarette, making out, and not leaving a tip!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Funny. So she's just driving the car, decides to pull over and pull a gun on two passengers in Boy's Town without provocative? Rideshare drives and taxi drivers carry weapons for protection. So what happened before the gun came out? That's the story?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, regardless of what happened under your theory, it did not rise to the level of a crime because the two men were not charged and she was--three times.

      Delete
  7. According to this article: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/rideshare-driver-points-gun-at-passengers-police-442548813.html, the driver has a valid concealed carry license, so just given that concealed carriers are the least likely demographic to commit any crime, much less a firearm crime, I would suspect that she was threatened by the two men that she had in her car in some way, and they just managed to get a photo and call to the police before she did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The law does not permit you to brandish a handgun during an argument. Even if you are in the, ahem, "the least likely demographic to commit any crime."

      Delete
    2. As I said, I suspect that she didn't "brandish" the handgun, but rather engaged in a defensive display against two men who represented a significant disparity of force against her lone female self. From both professional experience and extensive professional research in the field, licensed concealed carriers are literally the demographic that is least likely to commit any sort of crime, especially a firearm-based offense, to the point of being between 3 to 6 times less likely to do so than even police officers.

      Thus, the Occam's Razor likelihood is that the situation was that the smaller, less physically capable female felt sufficiently threatened by two larger, more physically capable males, and produced her firearm in a defensive display meant to dissuade them from escalating to the point of physical confrontation. Which is entirely legal, I can tell you from personal experience.

      Now, admittedly there is a very small likelihood that wasn't the case, but as I stated above, I happen to have empirical, professional experience of a considerable amount that shows me that the vast, overwhelming majority of firearm usages, including non-firing defensive displays, by concealed carry licensees have sufficient "fear of harm" justification to ultimately obviate criminal conviction.

      Incidentally, a significant part of my professional background involves both legal research and firearms training, and I've been involved with the subject of concealed carry for several years politically, legally, and instructively, so I speak from a position of actual, real-world knowledge and experience on this sort of incident.

      Delete
    3. You are a damned fool and anyone listening to your advice regarding brandishing a firearm in an argument deserves the criminal charges that they will get.

      Delete
    4. The law, nor actual incidents, do not require an individual who draws a concealed firearm for self-defense purposes to fire it at their assailant(s). In fact, I've been in multiple incidents where I have had to draw my firearm on individuals who were intent on interacting with me in a criminal way and I have even reported such incidents to the CPD. The result, no charges were filed against me in any of the incidents. As well, I am personally aware of dozens of other non-firing defensive displays of concealed carry firearms in Chicago and in Illinois, as well as other states by self-defense trainees of mine, and again, any criminal charges that were filed were dismissed since the incidents were legitimate self-defense displays.

      That experience, as well as extensive legal consultation with criminal defense attorneys and law enforcement, informs my viewpoint on this subject as the correct one.

      The bottom line is that it is, in fact, perfectly legal to draw one's firearm in self-defense and not shoot an assailant. It's actually preferable, since then the defender does not need to deal with the aftermath of having to have shot another person, the attacker does not get injured or killed, and the legal system does not need to expend resources to determine if the incident is a legitimate self-defense shooting.

      If the ride-share driver drew her firearm in a legitimate self-defense situation where she was in fear for her safety against two males, her likely mistake is that SHE was not the one to call police and report it first, and thus the police had to respond to the complaint filed by the first reporters rather than hers. I promise you that if she had called the police and told them, "I just drew my concealed firearm against two individuals who were threatening me in my vehicle; I want to file a complaint against them," the two riders would be the ones facing charges.

      As it stands, if she has any justification for being in fear for her safety, the charges will be dropped as they almost always are against concealed carriers in these kind of situations, in my considerable experience.

      Delete
    5. You're an idiot. Pulling a firearm without justification is an escalating action. Anyone who follows your advice to draw for the hell of it is out of their minds.

      Delete
  8. I for one am waiting to hear what the rest of the story is.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree that there's likely another side to the story that we haven't heard.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As a follow-up to this incident, the Sun-Times reported that the court date for this case was September 11, before Judge Anthony John Calabrese.

    A check of every court docket and blotter shows no cases pending with the Lyft driver's name, and a follow-up by phone shows no further publicly available information about the case, which generally indicates that the charges were probably dropped.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You continue to be wrong. Her next court date is October 3. No charges have been dropped.

      Delete
  11. Any updates on the disposition of this case? Follow-up is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't worry, girl. We'll let you know when it's over. Next court date Dec 19.

      Delete