Indexes
February 9th, 2010
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- President Obama's first year (45)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (44)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
- Tasered suspect claims he is Yosemite Sam (25)
ADVERTISEMENT
Lodi mom resolves messy house case
Charge will be dismissed in year if no further trouble
A Lodi mother whose messy house triggered her arrest, a notice to vacate and the involvement of Cild Protective Services has resolved her criminal case.
If Alisha Blake, 28, avoids any trouble for the next year, the misdemeanor child endangerment charge will be dismissed next August, according to San Joaquin County court records.
The children's father, Rick Munn, 34, has pleaded not guilty to the same charge and will return to court next Tuesday, according to San Joaquin County court records.
The two were arrested July 29 after Lodi police dispatchers received a 9-1-1 that was disconnected, then sent an officer to check on the home in the 1400 block of Park Street.
Police said at the time that the home was so messy that one bedroom door wouldn't open and that clothing and other belongings were piled several feet high. Two children, ages 2 and 4, appeared to be healthy, police said, but they determined that the condition of the home was enough for an arrest.
That day city code enforcement officers inspected the home, deemed it to have "substandard living conditions" and ordered it vacated within five days. They also ordered that the living room and garage be cleaned up, that rooms have three-and-a-half-foot clear walkways, garbage be removed from the back porch and that smoke detectors be cleared.
Those issues have since been resolved, and the house cleared an inspection on Tuesday, said Supervising Community Improvement Officer Jamie Aldred. The case is closed, she said, meaning that no follow-up inspections will be conducted. Officers handle about 50 to 75 new cases each month, according to Aldred.
Blake was home Thursday and declined to comment about the case.
Though she pleaded guilty on Tuesday, in a year that plea will be withdrawn and the case closed through a process called a "plea in abeyance." In the meantime, a judge ruled that Blake could be subject to visits by CPS at any time.
Contact reporter Layla Bohm at layla@lodinews.com.
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Lodian wrote on Aug 21, 2009 12:38 PM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 21, 2009 12:37 PM:
trade wrote on Aug 21, 2009 12:26 PM:
that the D.A. dropped all charges against the father. AMAZING!!! "
Brian wrote on Aug 21, 2009 11:44 AM:
Brian: You assume incorrectly here as WCPatty received an invite for discussion, nothing more. Please pay attention. "
What does this have to do with the fact that WCPatty's frontal lobe is more developed than yours? "
campking wrote on Aug 20, 2009 1:23 PM:
campking wrote on Aug 20, 2009 1:22 PM:
If we want to truly be a free and happy society, we must take back our personal responsibility, hold those whom break laws responsible, and tend to our own families' needs while keeping our noses out of our neighbors business. If we continue to give away our personal rights and our personal freedoms, we won't be a free country for much longer. It's time to stop inviting big government into our lives and start living responsibly. "
campking wrote on Aug 20, 2009 1:16 PM:
I guess what I'm getting at is we often think with our emotions. Someone made the statement that "if the home is messy, then the children should be removed". Who are you, or better yet, who is the government to say what constitutes a clean home? Your version of clean might be way yonder different than mine. Many farm children live in dirt all the time. Not because they're neglecting their kids, but because they live and work in a dirty environment. Studies have shown, and I think we can all agree, farm kids are usually the stronger, more healthy kids on the playground. I have kind of got off the point of this particular article, but this was purposeful. Again, people tend to react with emotion, and don't think of the bigger picture. "
campking wrote on Aug 20, 2009 1:07 PM:
So, to who's standard do we hold folks? If you leave your lawn mower out in the middle of the lawn, some might say you are a slob. For others, your "neat and tidy" home might have a foreign odor. I can't comment as to the officers involved. We have highly qualified persons serving this city, and I believe most if not all take calling CPS very seriously.
We still live in a free country, though some would argue that statement as well. The problem we have is that no one is held to any standard of RESPONSIBILITY. Even in these posts, many have dismissed these parents' "problems" off to something or someone else's impact. "They must have been abused", or "they must have grown up in a messy home". "
trade wrote on Aug 20, 2009 11:48 AM:
Rhodie wrote on Aug 20, 2009 11:20 AM:
PS. Turns out my future wife was living in the apartment right below me but we never met that summer. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 20, 2009 9:12 AM:
Brian: Sorry, but those roaches were begging me to take them away from your home. How can you raise a family in that apartment? "
Lodian wrote on Aug 20, 2009 9:11 AM:
Brian: You assume incorrectly here as WCPatty received an invite for discussion, nothing more. Please pay attention. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 20, 2009 9:09 AM:
Brian wrote on Aug 20, 2009 8:20 AM:
" Brian: I suggest that you clean up that house of yours before you invite WCPatty over for a visit. "
-You hardly have any room to talk. The word is out the roaches are ready to have you arrested for taking them hostage. "
Brian wrote on Aug 20, 2009 8:17 AM:
" I wonder if WCPatty will be back to discuss this topic. I was interested in hearing what she thinks about the questions that I posed the other day. I don't work for CPS so I don't know if they actually have some kind form, or whatever, that they might go by when viewing a dumpy/messy/cluttered etc home with children involved. I’m curious. "
-It seems to me Lodian is conceding that WCPatty is more qualified to make an assessment of this situation. A first for Lodian actually admitting she is wrong. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 19, 2009 4:04 PM:
I believe the criteria that CPS uses is fire escape. If a house is deemed so messy that escaping a fire would be hampered then CPS can step in. This would mean doors or windows being blocked both for the occupants and for the fire crew responding. In those cases the parents can be charged with child endangerment. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 19, 2009 2:10 PM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 18, 2009 12:17 PM:
Rhodie wrote on Aug 18, 2009 9:48 AM:
Rhodie. "
The problem I have with WCPatty's pondering is that it is so abstract that it borders on useless. *A* (Yes I'm sure there have been others) case when a pigsty house was the sight of child sexual abuse leads her to say there might be a correlation between the two. All I am saying is that the stat of a house is (and can never be used as) an to suspect someone of child sexual abuse. Child endangerment depends on the state of the house. A pigsty of a house or an impeccablly clean house both have equal chances of hiding child sexual abuse. Which leads us back to what I said before, any population "may sometimes" be an indication of child sexual abouse. So identifying one and saying this could be an indication is akin to saying a particular age group "may sometimes" speed, it is useless speculation. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 18, 2009 8:52 AM:
Brian wrote on Aug 18, 2009 7:56 AM:
Rhodie. "
Brian wrote on Aug 18, 2009 7:51 AM:
" Lodian: of course abuse can happen in the cleanest of homes. It can happen anywhere. However, the point you repeatedly miss, is that SOMETIMES, again SOMETIMES (in case you missed it a fourth time) such conditions ARE an indication of something much more dire going on. Does it necessarily correlate with sexual abuse? No. (Which is why I included the word SOMETIMES as a caveat in my first post.)
-Lodian misses a lot of things. Oh, but heaven forbid she acknowledge it. "
Brian wrote on Aug 18, 2009 7:42 AM:
has a good assessment of this messy house case and he is not out of line at all. And Lodian should re-think her position that no one should have been arrested. Except for her, it's quite obvious that a lot more was going on in this house. But she continues to make excuses for these people who have no regard for the safety and the health of their children. That's enough for me. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 17, 2009 11:21 PM:
Rhodie wrote on Aug 17, 2009 3:35 PM:
I got the "cheaper" one (one's 120ish vs 80ish). The steam kicked right through some punch stains, various driplets around the kitchen and the grim around the bathroom. The handle feels a little flimsy for me, but then again I keep waiting for black and decker to make power cleaning tools (you know, like a 3hp scrubber for the toilet or 10hp vacuum).
I've been using a little steamer for around the sinks and counters and love it. It's really good at blasting gunk out of cracks and such. Even has a window attachment that tore through greasy finger prints and dog slobber (OK, the dog thinks it is a cat and sits in the window, pressing his nose to the glass.)
All in all I am big fan of steam cleaning. I am just biting my time until I can upgrade my 12yr old washer and dryer to the new steam cleaners. My mom has one and loves it. "
WCPatty wrote on Aug 17, 2009 1:33 PM:
And, as I already explained, I never asserted a dirty house is an automatic connection to abuse which is why I repeatedly qualified the Maxwell case as an extreme example. But I cannot believe any reasonable person would not suspect possible serious mental/emotional issues of adults living in piles of garbage and filth and would want to ensure the safety of any children living in such conditions.
I absolutely and unapologetically support removing minor children from unsanitary and unsafe conditions until the situation is resolved. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 17, 2009 11:59 AM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 17, 2009 11:58 AM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 17, 2009 11:56 AM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 17, 2009 11:48 AM:
WCPatty: It's very small of you to suggest such a thing because I disagree with your comments. If you want to make this personal we can certainly do so, but I suggest you take the high road. I, in no way, shape or form, even suggested that I think living in garbage/clutter is acceptable. BUT, I wouldn't so casually draw a line connecting such a home with child sexual abuse. It's simply wrong and unethical to assume such acts because these people have a garbage/clutter problem. Maybe you know these people, but I do not, and I am not about to assume they are horrible parents/people because they are garbage collectors. There are some very good people with this kind of garbage/clutter problem. Look into it. And I'm sure you must be aware that there are some families, living in beautiful pristine homes with perfect manners that have done horrible things to their children. The point? Don't assume/suggest something so horrible as child sexual abuse because someone has a garbage/clutter issue in their home. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 17, 2009 11:29 AM:
WCPatty: Using your same argument then someone could say that obesity (I don't know what the people in these cases looked like just using an example) may sometimes lead to child abuse. Or speeding. Would you be comfortable making that staement? Your argument generalizing about a population (child abusers) far more complex than you are giving them credit for. Yes, if Erin Maxwell had been removed from her house she would likely still be alive. But do you want the precedent that if a house is too messy then you are immediately put under suspicion of child abuse?
"MAY SOMETIMES" is a great catch all. A football player, politician, teacher, blogger may sometimes be a child abuser. Any population may sometimes be a child abuser. A population's "may sometimes" cannot be a reason they lose their kids because then everyone would lose their kids because everyone belongs to a may sometimes population "
WCPatty wrote on Aug 17, 2009 9:45 AM:
The connection was made in my initial post where I mentioned the extreme case of Erin Maxwell. The horrible conditions that girl lived in unfortunately DID coincide with abuse. (And I personally regard "messy" as a vast understatement of 4-5 ft. piles of garbage and feces).
If one could conclude that if such conditions may be connected with depression and other mental health issues, it's not a far leap that such psychological issues MAY SOMETIMES lead to and include abuse. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 17, 2009 8:27 AM:
WCPatty: Unfortunately the argument that a messy house might indicate child abuse sometimes is attempting to draw a connection between two unconnected things. It is like saying that since some child abusers drive trucks then trucks can sometimes be used to indicate child abuse. Or smoking, or wearing mis-matched socks.
I agree that a house in that bad of shape is an indication of problems but I suspect a depression or mild schitzophrenia type disorder. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 17, 2009 8:21 AM:
I cleaned a bit more but that was only because I got a new toy. A Shark floor Steam cleaner. Have to say, only used it once on the stone flooring but it cleaned everything from the bathroom to the kitchen and even the recuring spray adhesive (long story short I should have laid down a cheap sheet before a craft project). And a day later I don't see any streaks (kind of hard to see on stone anyway but the floor feels clean). "
WCPatty wrote on Aug 17, 2009 7:19 AM:
What some people are missing here is that the police weren't going door-to-door, "gestapo" style doing a white glove check. They had responded to a 911 call at the house, and found the conditions to be a potential firetrap to the kids and took steps to correct the situation.
Finally, there is a big difference between a "messy" house (which by BH&G standards, my own may be classified as 90% of the time) and 4 -ft. piles of stinking garbage (as stated in the initial article about this case) or cat feces (as was in the Maxwell case). If you find such conditions acceptable for children to live in, then I feel sorry for any children you may have. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 16, 2009 4:49 PM:
Please remember that one cannot assume child sexual abuse in a family because they have accumulated too much garbage/clutter in their home. "
Lodian wrote on Aug 16, 2009 4:36 PM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 16, 2009 4:35 PM:
" Lodian: please take the time to reread my post. I said SOMETIMES such squaller is an indication of more serious problems in the home..."
Sometimes a seemingly perfect home is the indication of more serious problems in the home. Do you disagree? "
Lodian wrote on Aug 16, 2009 4:32 PM:
1422 wrote on Aug 16, 2009 2:02 PM:
WCPatty wrote on Aug 16, 2009 8:07 AM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 15, 2009 4:48 PM:
WCPatty wrote on Aug 15, 2009 8:24 AM:
ordinarycitizen wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:16 PM:
ordinarycitizen wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:06 PM:
dogs4you wrote on Aug 14, 2009 5:38 PM:
The government, according to you tells everyone, not just some. I this case a word to the wise is sufficient.
As a kid I wore a helmet when riding my motercycle long before it was mandatory, I`ll never understand how those stupid "beanie" helmets got by the CHP. It really dosn`t matter anyway, when you take a fall off a motercycle, the arms become noodles, they are the first things that go, then the head. There are two kinds of guys that ride motercycles, those that have been down and those that will. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 14, 2009 4:57 PM:
" Rhodi... Do you agree EVERY small child's life is precious? "
Every child's life is precious, but do you want the government telling you how to raise your children? Just how far do you want the Government to step into your life and say this is what you are allowed to do? Kids drown at lakes, should they be banned from visiting them? In my parents town a little girl just died from playing in a fountain and drowning while the parents looked away "for just a second", should all the public fountains be drained?
I agree there needs to be some standard of safty, but there also needs to be a standard of parent responsibility and personal responsibility. City Gov has enough budget problems without spending money on an inspector to come out to tell me how to keep my kids safe. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 14, 2009 4:50 PM:
I wore my seabelt long before they were required.
"some people need a little help from big brother to keep the kids safe."
Unfortunately the Gov. doesn't tell "some people", it tells everyone.
As for recurring pool costs, how much to you spend watering you grass a year and how often do you use that?
In the end it isn't about the money, it is about the time with family and memories. I have memories from years growing up with a pool, playing with my brother (his favorite game was to try and push my head under until I got bigger than him) and parents in the pool. The biggest thing the kids look forward to when visiting the grandparents is time in the pool, 3-4 hours a day for the week down. And thinking about it pool time here is really May through Sept. Five months or 150 days. So 150 days for the 12 yrs left with kids in the house, what is the value of those memories? "
Lodian wrote on Aug 14, 2009 4:47 PM:
So, T & C, the dad is not supposed to be clean and pick up his garbage too? "
T & C wrote on Aug 14, 2009 4:32 PM:
dogs4you wrote on Aug 14, 2009 4:09 PM:
I do not advocate the government telling me anything, but some people need a little help from big brother to keep the kids safe. Do you wear your seat belt as they are mandates by the government, and do save lives. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 14, 2009 3:47 PM:
Don't know about you but I just about live in a pool when I have one available. 30 days? I'm guessing well over 100 days. Not to mention time playing with the family, pool parties and a really nice way to cool off after a long bike ride.
In terms of a toddler wandering into the pool. Is it your belief that it is the governments responsibility to dictate how we monitor our children? Toddlers die every year from getting into the cleaning cupboard, should the government inspect those as well? How about the number of kids that get ran over because they run behind their parents car backing up, should the government require those backing up cameras as well.
I don't mean this as advesarial as it sounds, I'm just curious as to how far into our personal life you think the government should reach for the *illusion* of safty? "
dogs4you wrote on Aug 14, 2009 1:43 PM:
T & C wrote on Aug 14, 2009 12:09 PM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 14, 2009 12:06 PM:
Lodian wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:53 AM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:41 AM:
Rhodie wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:11 AM:
Considering I just had to install ear piercing door alarms so my kids can't play in the backyard without me knowing it due to a Code law requiring such (new pool), I agree with you Cog. Just where do we start taking responsibility for our own actions vs having the gov. dictate everything to us?
Sidenote: it took my youngest all of five minutes to figure out how to pull a chair over to get to the safty alarm and turn it off.
I'm sure the neighbors are going to love the alarm going off in the middle of the night for the next few weeks when my half asleep son gets up to let out the in desperate need of a bathroom dog. "
Rhodie wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:05 AM:
" What's next, people getting their kids taken away because they smoke around them,"
Too late Cog. It is already a law!
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/health&id=5869495 "
ordinarycitizen wrote on Aug 14, 2009 11:01 AM:
ordinarycitizen wrote on Aug 14, 2009 10:54 AM:
boonablis wrote on Aug 14, 2009 10:00 AM:
LodiReaderFromStockton wrote on Aug 14, 2009 9:54 AM:
commentator wrote on Aug 14, 2009 9:51 AM:
plmd wrote on Aug 14, 2009 9:10 AM:
I feel they could have easily referred CPS to the couples home instead of making an arrest and doing so in front on the children! Which is far more tramatic for the babies.
Another reason to think of Lodi Cops using their power to stroke their egos! "
Cogito wrote on Aug 14, 2009 8:47 AM:
Cogito wrote on Aug 14, 2009 8:46 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.