34°Overcast

UPDATED: Man Arrested After Stabbing Vandal

by ARLnow.com — June 1, 2012 at 11:30 am 9,870 405 Comments

(Updated at 9:10 p.m.) A 27-year-old Arlington man has been arrested after police say he stabbed a man who was vandalizing houses near Clarendon.

The incident happened just before 2:00 a.m. this morning, June 1, on the 800 block of N. Irving Street. According to Arlington County Police spokesman Dustin Sternbeck, three subjects were vandalizing houses — breaking items and throwing porch chairs and plants into the street — when Mauricio Canales, 27, came outside to confront them.

At some point Canales — who had been drinking, according to investigators — went back into the house and retrieved a large kitchen knife.

Canales told police that one of the subjects took a swing at him. Then, police say, he pulled out the knife and stabbed the subject just below the jawline. The subject fled the scene and eventually staggered over to Fire Station No. 2 in Bluemont with a five inch stab wound to his jaw area, along with lacerations to his forearm and hand. The subject was brought to a local hospital and his injuries are considered non-life-threatening, Sternbeck said.

Police arriving on scene at Irving Street found the bloody knife and the vandalized chairs in the street. Canales was located at his home, wearing a white shirt with blood on it, Sternbeck said. He was arrested, charged with malicious wounding, and is currently being held without bond.

So far, no charges have been filed against the three alleged vandals.

  • novasteve

    Wait, so the guy is charged for defending himself, but no charge for assault for the vandal as well as their vandalism crimes?

    Are we living in bizarro world here?

    • http://www.arlnow.com ARLnow.com

      This isn’t to say that charges won’t eventually be filed, but at this time the alleged vandals have not been charged, according to police.

      • novasteve

        Might I suggest the police get their priorities right? A man is charged for defending himself immediately, but they will only consider later charges for a group of three who assaulted a man as well as were alleged to have been committing property crimes?

        Perhaps someone from the ACPD would like to explain why they are punishing someone for defending themselves and not punishing people who commit assault and property crimes? What kind of precedent will this set? If I defend myself if I see a crime being committed, I’ll get charged? I guess I should let them kill me? ARlington will have to live without my car taxes.

        • drax

          Unless he usually walks around with a knife, this either came outside with a weapon or went to get one and came back. Either way is NOT self-defense.

          You’re a lawyer, steve, right?

          • novasteve

            It’s illegal to carry a knife in VA but not a gun? If someone attacks you you can’t do anything about it? You don’t think it was reasonable for him to fear for his life being confronted by 3 people and one was attacking him? Are you suggesting he’s not allowed to go outside? Are we under military rule and he was ordered to remain inside?

          • Zoning Victim

            How can anyone know if it was reasonable for him to fear for his life with as little information as there is in this article?

          • drax

            “It’s illegal to carry a knife in VA but not a gun?”

            Didn’t say that.

            “If someone attacks you you can’t do anything about it?”

            Didn’t say that.

            “You don’t think it was reasonable for him to fear for his life being confronted by 3 people and one was attacking him?”

            Don’t know – because I wasn’t there and didn’t investigate it. LIke I said.

            “Are you suggesting he’s not allowed to go outside?”

            Didn’t say that.

            “Are we under military rule and he was ordered to remain inside?”

            Didn’t say that.

          • JR

            No – but you did basically say that he’s not allowed to be ready to defend himself when confronting people causing damage to his property.

            If I walked out to my front porch in circumstances such as this, you better believe I’d be armed – as this guy was. Just because one is armed does not mean he’s planning to immediately make use of what he’s armed with.

            When I carry a .45 to the grocery store, I don’t automatically lose my right to self-defense as you apparently imply.

          • drax

            “but you did basically say that he’s not allowed to be ready to defend himself when confronting people causing damage to his property.”

            Didn’t say that either.

          • Narlington

            the “bad guy” was breaking property. property that can be replaced but you want to take his life for that? really

          • KalashniKEV

            Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

          • BoredHouseWife

            It isn’t about that. If they man confronted the vandals and one of them reacted by attacking, and then that man reacted to pulling out his pocket knife to defend himself from attack, it is self defense.

            It all depends if he came outside with a machete or reached to grab his pocket knife.

          • KalashniKEV

            Wrong again, BHW.

            1) Reasonable fear of death or grievous bodily harm
            2) Overt gesture that threat is immient
            3) ON LIKE DONKEY KONG!!!

          • KalashniKEV

            *imminent

          • Sam

            Do you know the difference between the executive branch and the judicial branch? The executive branch executes the laws as they are written. In this case, he stabbed someone and was charged. It is up to the judicial branch to interpret the law and determine if he was within his rights to stab the victim to defend himself.

            Charged != Convicted

          • Arlington, Northside

            If he went outside after hearing noises of distruction to stop the distruction, why should he do it without a weapon? If the vandals then attacked him, how is this not self-defense? Obviously he should have first called 911, but why should he allow his things to be distroyed?

          • drax

            It MIGHT be self-defense. We don’t know…because (repeat it everyone) we don’t have all the facts.

            As for his things being destroyed, no, that alone is not a defense for killing someone with a knife, or trying to.

          • novasteve

            But it is a defense to being ATTACKED

          • Jason S.

            Drax, I’m starting to think you have a personal interest in the vandals walking away from this without any punishment.

          • jackson

            Ha! And you have gone from hating on the police with the barest of information to imagining that one of the 3 was “Drax Jr.”

          • novasteve

            Clearly you aren’t a lawyer, drax.

            He’s allowed to have a knife, especially when he’s responding to what he believes was a crime being committed by him.

            If you get attacked, you can use reasonable force in self defense. If someone uses deadly force against you, you can use deadly force in self defense. A punch can kill a person.

          • drax

            “He’s allowed to have a knife, especially when he’s responding to what he believes was a crime being committed by him.”

            Didn’t say he wasn’t allowed to have it. I said he’s not allowed to kill someone unless he’s acting in defense of his life (not his property).

            “If you get attacked, you can use reasonable force in self defense. If someone uses deadly force against you, you can use deadly force in self defense. A punch can kill a person.”

            Um, yes, I already acknowledged all that.

          • Bill

            Who did he kill?

          • Scott

            Any time someone throws a punch you really believe that legally gives the other party carte blanche to respond with deadly force?

          • Zoning Victim

            If he came outside with the weapon, had it hidden, attempted to retreat but couldn’t and didn’t use it until he was attacked, he is protecting himself (though he may be guilty of illegally carrying a concealed weapon). Obviously, that’s not what the police believe happened.

            If he ran back in and got it, then he certainly wasn’t protecting himself, and if he came out with it in his hand, he’s guilty of brandishing a deadly weapon and assault since use of deadly force to protect property is not legal in VA. Interestingly, pets are considered property in VA.

            As much as we’d like to think we have the same rights as the police when it comes to stopping a crime and protecting ourselves, we don’t. If you go outside your home to confront someone who is committing a property crime (including stealing fluffy) and end up using deadly force against them, you’re most likely going to be charged with assault. Calling the police is a much better idea.

          • novasteve

            But are we at the point that those who committed the actual first assault and the property crimes isn’t charged, but the guy defending himself is?

            Bizarro world.

          • Zoning Victim

            Well, I agree they should be charged, but under Virginia law, you can’t initiate a confrontation and then use deadly force to end it and call it self defense unless you attempt to retreat from the situation “to the wall.” I’m not saying I agree with it or wouldn’t go confront them myself (I actually agree with SYG laws), but that’s the law here in Virginia.

          • novabull

            no we are not…and only paranoid right wing loonies would even think that

          • Narlington

            being stabbed in the mouth isn’t enough punishment? what do you want to do to him whip him too

          • Arlingtune

            He got sliced up on the arm and hand too. Bet he’ll think twice before touching someone’s property again.

          • Dan

            What makes you guys even know for sure he was the one who was destroying stuff? the report says he heard a noise and came outside right? How many drunk people walk around the neighborhoods leaving the bars at night? Theres no parking outsie the bars, so people park in neighborhoods and walk. theres no proving the three of them were commiting the crime. In Va its illegal to vandalize. If they werent arrested on the spot theres obviously doubt they did it. Even if they did, stabbing someone a couple times for throwing a lawn chair is dumb. yell at them make them pick it up, call the police, but dont stab someone over it.

          • Bill

            He didn’t stab him for destroying property, there was a confrontation that resulted in a stabbing.

          • KalashniKEV

            Drax, respectfully, you clearly don’t understand the application of deadly force criteria in the Commonwealth. Whether or not he “usually” carries a knife is irrelevant.

          • drax

            Kev, this is not about the criteria, it is about how it applies in this specific case. And the facts we know from this story, like most media reports about crimes, don’t give us enough information to conclude that they applied or did not apply.

          • Arlingtune

            “Kev, this is not about the criteria, it is about how it applies in this specific case”

            What the heck does that even mean?

          • drax

            It’s not about what the law is, but what the facts of this case are and how the law applies to them.

            I thought it was clear the first time.

          • Arlingtune

            Yeah, they go hand in hand. How can you discuss how the facts apply without discussing the law?

            And as you are so fond of saying, we do not know all the facts so why even talk about it?

          • KalashniKEV

            You don’t even know all the facts, maaaaaaan!

            *long toke, pedals away on bicycle*

          • greg

            so if someone is outside destroying your property with two other individuals you can’t go outside and try to stop it and bring a knife with you incase the 3 crazies decide to attack and kill you?

        • Guest

          I wonder what the law is, surely you are allowed to defend your home in Virginia?

          • drax

            No, you may not go out and kill someone for vandalizing your property. Duh.

          • curious george

            Although you should be able to do so. Evolution in action.

          • John Fontain

            He killed someone? I must have missed that part of the article.

          • jackson

            It doesn’t say they were vandalizing HIS home.

          • arlington gun owner

            +1

            and INSIDE and OUTSIDE of your home are two different things in VA. But there arent all the facts here. we dont even know if it was his home.

          • Zoning Victim

            Not like that, you’re not. The only times you are allowed to use deadly force in Virginia are when you or someone else is being threatened with death or serious bodily harm.

          • novasteve

            Plenty of people get killed by punches. You could fall and crack your head open.

          • Zoning Victim

            I just attended a class a few months ago about the use of deadly force in VA and I believe your assumptions about how the law works in these cases are wrong. You simply cannot initiate a confrontation with someone committing a property crime and then use deadly force against them.

            The prosecutor will tell you that if you were that afraid of the individuals ability to kill you with one punch, you wouldn’t have started the confrontation to begin with.

          • drax

            But we don’t know whether he was punched before he threatened the vandal with a knife. It could have been self-defense by the puncher for all we know.

            We…don’t…know…enough…to…say.

          • novasteve

            So he should be confined to his home? He can’t investigate? Did he absolutely know there were three people outside and not three squirrels?

            How is it starting a confrontation to investigate if a crime is occuring? Since when are people forced to remain in their homes? I can damn well go outside whenever the hell I choose to and so can anyone else unless they are under house arrest. I don’t live in Saudi Arabia. Maybe if you want to move to a country where you can’t go outside, you’d be happier?

          • jackson

            (1) Squirrels aren’t nocturnal.

            (2) With whom are you arguing?

            “How is it starting a confrontation to investigate if a crime is occurring?”

            The post says: “Mauricio Canales, 27, came outside to confront them.”

            Are you questioning the wording of ArlNow? Or are you questioning the police?

          • drax

            So he took a knife outside just in case he had to confront 3 squirrels?

          • drax

            It’s right there in the law:

            Code of Virginia, Title 68, Chapter 4

            “A resident of the Commonwealth may investigate vandalism by nocturnal squirrels with the aid of a weapon.”

          • novasteve

            So he’s required by law to stay in his house? What is this, the soviet union? I’ll go outside whenever the hell I want to.

          • Narlington

            and then you get charged with manslaughter. oh the other person doesn’t get charged even if he threw the first punch

          • BoredHouseWife

            uh squirrels are nocturnal Jackson

          • jackson

            Nope. Not nocturnal.

          • KalashniKEV

            Disparity of force/ size of the attacker, 3-on-1, there are tons of viable defenses here. This will likely get dropped.

          • Bob

            3 on 1 in the dark sounds like I could fear for serious bodily harm. Especially when the 3 have already displayed felonious behavior.

          • Scott

            Is vandalism a felony?

          • Bill

            Vandalism should be a felony, especially when you brazenly do it in a threatening manner.

        • Having fun yet?

          Sounds to me like everyone was getting the weekend started a little early, including Canales, who police say had been drinking. No one who goes back into their house after confronting three vandals to retrieve “a large kitchen knife” and then stab someone for breaking a few flower pots instead of calling police is “defending themselves.” They’re being a vigilante, and escalating the situation past petty property destruction and you know it. This is the result of all those macho fantasies about “home defense.” Four drunk guys acting dumb and one nearly getting his throat slashed.

          In fact, the police report said Canales confronted the vandals in the street – not his own property. Nice guys don’t stab other people in the neck because they tossed a lawn chair in the street. Drunk guys do that. A broken flower pot isn’t worth stabbing someone or getting stabbed. The appropriate response would have been to spray the three drunks with a garden hose with one hand while calling the police with another.

    • spaghetti

      I agree with Steve here… It was 3 on 1 and one of the vandals started to attack. I probably would have done the same thing.

      • NPGMBR

        I’m sure they will be charged. I can’t imagine that they won’t. What I’m not sure of and the post didn’t seem to mention is whether the valdals are being held pending charges!

        • Jason S.

          You can’t imagine they won’t be charged? Are you new to Arlington? ACPD are some fo the laziest and most incompetent police you are going to find. I would find it laughable, except I have to help pay those losers’ undeserved paychecks.

          • sunflower

            must control fist of dea! h!!!!!!!!

          • Narlington

            jason it appears you don’t like to the police. to much interaction with them?

          • sunflower

            thank you; i thought maybe he couldn’t make it at the Academy, but i like yours better

          • Jason S.

            Actually, when I separated from active duty, I did check out ACPD, but they were quite unimpressive (but better than DC).

          • Bill

            Actually I agree with Jason, not because of police bothering me, but because they refuse to do jack about brazen thugs damaging property and threatening anyone that gets anywhere near them while doing it.

          • Jason S.

            I’ve never been arrested in this county (or any county for that matter), but that doesn’t I want to pay for them to sit at the Starbuck’s for over an hour, park illegally, or arbitrarily enforce laws (such as vandalism).

          • CommonCents

            Jason S- If they were working and writing tickets, you’d claim the cops were out there revenue generating and getting a quota. If they stop to take a break, like any other employee that gets a lunch break, they are lazy and wasting your taxpaying dollars. So in your ideal world they drive around in circles for 10 hours straight because they can’t park, rest, write tickets, or eat. Sounds like you weren’t hired and you have an axe to grind.

          • Bill

            If they were busy writing tickets for minor traffic infractions instead of looking for thugs terrorizing homeowners, then I think they’re misrepresenting the people that pay their salaries.

    • drax

      Or maybe – just maybe – we don’t have all the facts, and should reserve judgment.

      Nah, that’s never happened on ArlNow before, why now?

      • D'oh!

        whaaaat?!?!?!! That’s crazy talk!

      • Ballstonia

        Says the guy who earnestly proclaimed, “Either way is NOT self-defense.”

        • drax

          “Either way” meant among the hypotheticals in my post.

          • Sybill

            It’s okay. The other 15 and I understood what you mean in your multiple contradictory speculations. It’s *OKAY* to have multiple voices inside your head like we do – we just don’t go spouting off dozens of times each article.

          • drax

            I haven’t contradicted myself.

          • http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/2/24/I_see_what_you_did_there_super.jpg BoredHouseWife

            I see it.

          • Ballstonia

            It is just amusing that you repeatedly admonish others for speculating as to what might have happened (“We…don’t…know…enough…to…say”), yet you eagerly throw out your own set of hypotheticals to back up your presumption that Canales did NOT act in self-defense.

          • drax

            There’s nothing wrong with speculating. What’s wrong is when you speculate but insist it’s not speculation, but settled fact.

    • Bob

      It is weird, since the statement that they were vandalizing property seems to come from the police themselves.

      Hopefully the CA is working on the paperwork.

      And I hope a jury would find this guy innocent of malicious wounding. How can you assume malice when you are being attacked?

      • drax

        If he was attacked, stopped fighting and went inside, and came back out with a knife, that’s malice. He didn’t need to do that to defend himself. But we don’t know the details.

        • Bob

          I am following the narrative in the story. It says after a guy swung on him, he stabbed him.

          Also, taking a swing at somebody is typically assault.

          More charges need to filed.

          • drax

            The narrative doesn’t tell the whole story, apparently. There are many details we need. This is why we have courts and judges and stuff, instead of people like you deciding things based on flimsy third-hand narratives.

            Yes, it looks like the other guys need to be arrested. No, it doesn’t appear to be self-defense. But we don’t know all the details.

          • Zoning Victim

            You’d have a hard time making the case that you feared for your life when it was your choice to insert yourself into the altercation with three other people to begin with unless one of them pulled out a weapon of their own. Remember, Virginia is not a stand your ground state.

            Like drax said, there just aren’t enough facts here to say either way. The bottom line is you should call the police in situations like this and stay out of it in Virginia. Confronting vandals with a kitchen knife is a bad idea no matter what. You’re illegally using deadly force to protect property to begin with, and in the worst case scenario, you just literally brought a knife to a gunfight.

      • KalashniKEV

        It’s going to get dropped. Wait and see…

    • KLB

      Not sure where you got he was defending himself. “Mauricio Canales, 27, came outside to confront them. A struggle ensued.”

      Agreed that the vandals should be charged, but stabbing someone in the face for throwing stuff in the street is probably excessive.

      • KalashniKEV

        Should he have let the 3 of them knock his teeth out or break his arms? Or I’ll bet you probably advocate calling the cops and hiding under the bed…

        Sic semper scumbag…

        • drax

          He CAME OUTSIDE. He wasn’t under any threat of getting his arms broken inside his home.

          • KalashniKEV

            “He CAME OUTSIDE.”

            Damn straight!

          • drax

            “I came outside with a knife, your honor, because I can’t let someone knock out my teeth or break my arms!”

            Yeah, that’ll work.

          • KalashniKEV

            Actually, it frequently does.

            No sensible person would confront 3 violent criminals at 2AM without a weapon.

          • drax

            “No sensible person would confront 3 violent criminals at 2AM without a weapon.”

            Yeah, exactly.

            Doesn’t prove he was threatened with bodily harm. Your property being vandalized isn’t bodily harm in itself.

            The real question here is to what extent you can defend your property, as opposed to your life. Can you use deadly force?

          • KalashniKEV

            He didn’t run out the door and stab them in defense of his property. He confronted them- and rather than turn and run, as you would expect a vandal to do when caught in the act, they stayed and tried to fight, swung on the resident (homeowner?) and… ooops… there’s the 1) Reasonable fear 2) Overt act 3) What comes next??? ON LIKE DONKEY KONG.

          • Bill

            OK, the fact that he had a knife doesn’t prove he was provoking a confrontation, just that he was prepared just in case. The thugs should have left and stopped terrorizing the neighborhood.

    • Narlington

      this is not Florida you can not go and stab someone who may have broken your property. If you want that then move to Florida

      • KalashniKEV

        Self Defense is a basic human right.

        If you don’t want that move… I don’t know where???

        • drax

          He said property, not self.

          • KalashniKEV

            Again, read the story- one of the 3 violent criminals attacked. Once you make it PHYSICAL, PHYSICAL! you take what comes.

            Play stupid games, win stupid prizes…

          • KalashniKEV

            Haha… it read my /ONJ tag as an actual tag…

    • Mary-Austin

      For once I agree with novasteve.

      Trev got what he had coming. Let’s hope he and his bros get charged with vandalism.

    • Bill

      Yea, that’s how they roll in Arlington, you can’t go around defending yourself when these disadvantaged youths are just trying to have a good time.

  • LP

    That guy definitely staggered a fair way from Clarendon to Bluemont.

    • Clarendon

      Seriously. I wonder if they drove there or walked. Maybe they were drunk. The fire station #4 is right there.

      • ArlLater

        I heard this entire altercation last night. At first I thought it was the usual end of night crowd just passing through from the bars but it seemed to get very serious very quickly. There was a ton of screaming back and forth and one of the guys yelled something about a machete and blood on someone’s shirt. The group of vandals drove away and were calling the police as they left the scene.

        • Keith

          Haha. Ultimate buzzkill. Can’t wait to scope out their LinkedIn profiles.

  • 350sbc

    wat

  • Guest

    It sounds like they arrested the wrong guy.

  • SteamboatWillie

    Viva Canales!

  • Brian

    Um…. self defense?

  • Dan

    That sounds a lot like self-defense to me…

    • drax

      I don’t think so. Vandals throwing bricks doesn’t necessarily equal fear for your life or your person, assuming that’s all they did.

      Still, the vandals should be arrested for vandalism.

      • Ben

        If someone starts throwing punches, I’m sorry but that is where the line was crossed.

        • drax

          False.

          If someone punches you, that’s not justification for murder.

          If you have to use force to stop it, and it results in a death, then yeah, it can be self-defense. But if you either show up with a weapon before the fight and start it, or leave the fight and get a weapon and come back, that’s not self-defense.

          • novasteve

            You can be killed by getting punched. I know someone who died from being punched. It’s deadly force. He didn’t start the fight. Have you bothered reading the story? They attacked him. in RESPONSE he stabbed the guy

          • Ben

            Agree with you if he somehow escalated the situation then yes he deserved what he got.

            But if he came out, told the people to leave and they confronted him – it could be a entirely different story. If I saw people doing something similar I would come out armed.

            I just hope this is not one of those – charge first and ask questions later situations.

          • Bob

            You need to stop speculating.

          • John Fontain

            “If someone punches you, that’s not justification for murder.”

            Was one of the crooks murdered? If not, LOGIC FAIL (as usual)!!!

          • Zoning Victim

            The justifiable use of deadly force and justifiable homicide must pass the same test for one just means you succeeded.

          • drax

            You’re right, I should have said “using deadly force.” Which everyone else here understood and accepted without commenting on.

          • John Fontain

            Everyone understood you meant something other than that which you said? How do you know this?

          • drax

            Nobody else felt the need to comment on what was obvious.

          • Bill

            Who was murdered?

        • Bob

          Exactly. Once you get in a struggle with someone, all bets are off. Which is also going to make it hard to convict on intent. Unlawful wounding or A&B.

          The vandals could have run away when dude came out and they wouldn’t be sitting in the hospital on a drip with a new zipper across their neck.

          • drax

            “Exactly. Once you get in a struggle with someone, all bets are off.”

            Really? Lots of people are spending life in prison because they thought that way.

            You don’t have carte blanche to kill someone just because they started a struggle with you. It ain’t that simple.

          • novasteve

            3 on 1, and the 3 started the fight. Not a chance he’ll be convicted.

          • Scott

            how do we know the 3 started the fight?

          • novasteve

            Because if you bothered to read the story, you’d know they did start the fight. See, one of the three PUNCHED the guy who got charged.

            Punching someone = starting it

          • Zoning Victim

            If you provoke the fight in any way and then use deadly force, you can be convicted.

          • Bob

            Give me an example of one. Provide a link.

          • John K.

            No… wait, that’s Drax’s line.

          • drax

            Really? You want me to provide you with an example of someone convicted of assault or murder after getting into a fight, Bob?

          • Zoning Victim

            Google Darryl Carneal Law v. Commonwealth, Va.

          • Bob

            And was sentenced to life. Yes, I want to see a link and later we can compare the circumstances.

          • arlington gun owner

            *cough*Treyvon Martin*cough*

      • novasteve

        HE WAS PUNCHED. Try reading the story.

        • Scott

          Doesn’t say he was punched. I read here one (drunk) guy swung & was then immediately stabbed in the face by the other guy.

          • novasteve

            So if he had instead of throwing a punch had taken out a gun, fired and missed, self defense wouldn’t be justified because he missed? give me a break.

          • Scott

            because a drunk guy trying and failing to punch someone is similar to someone firing at you…

          • Scott

            he wasn’t punched or shot at; it does not say he was attacked by three people. it says one guy swung and that person was then immediately stabbed in the face. That’s all it says

            everything else is ‘if’…

          • drax

            No, because a fist isn’t a gun.

          • jackson

            Fact: If that gentleman in the other story had PUNCHED his television instead of shot it, he would not have been charged!

          • novasteve

            Both are deadly weapons. A puffer fish isn’t a gun, yet I could kill you with one.

          • drax

            Puffer fish?

            Not all weapons are equal. Not all require equal response.

    • drax

      P.S. Wait a minute:

      “After one of the subjects took a swing at him”

      So there WAS a fight.

      Still, going inside and getting a knife and coming back out to fight more, if that’s how it played out, isn’t self-defense.

      • Clarendon

        As long as we are speculating… I suspect Canales heard the commotion outside at 2AM, may have peeked out the window and saw shadowy figures up to no good, went to the kitchen to get a weapon and then went outside.

      • Ballstonian

        Where do you get that he went back in and got the knife as opposed to had it on him? While we don’t have all the details, that seems to be assuming a pretty big one.

        • Bob

          (repeat it everyone) we don’t have all the facts

          I’ve heard that somewhere before. Just thought I would share.

        • Juanita de Talmas

          Doesn’t everyone carry a kitchen knife with them?

      • novasteve

        From what I read he had the knife on him as he was going out to see if a crime was being committed. There’s no indication he went back in to get a knife, then stabbed someone. It says someone took a swing at him, and immediately he stabbed the guy.

      • John Fontain

        Apparently the ‘no speculating’ rule being shouted from the mountain top by drax doesn’t apply to himself. Too funny!!

        • drax

          No, John, speculation is fine – as long as you acknowledge that it is speculation. See how that works?

          • Sybil

            Sybil Isabel Dorsett: everything was speculation
            Victoria Antoinette Scharleau: agreed, speculation
            Peggy Lou Baldwin: agreed, speculation
            Peggy Ann Baldwin: agreed, speculation
            Mary Lucinda Saunders Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Marcia Lynn Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Vanessa Gail Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Mike Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Sid Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Nancy Lou Ann Baldwin: agreed, speculation
            Sybil Ann Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Ruthie Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Clara Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Helen Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            Marjorie Dorsett: agreed, speculation
            The Blonde: agreed, speculation
            d r a x: agreed, speculation

            see how easy it is to admit everything stated was speculation?

  • JohnB

    That seems about right, wait what!?

  • Stoneridge

    “After one of the subjects took a swing at him, Canales pulled out a large kitchen knife and stabbed him just below the jawline, according to Sternbeck.” Below the jawline would be in the throat, right?

  • Hattie McDaniel

    Stand yo’ ground, honey!

  • Mike

    Early this morning, I noticed some items were knocked over (stacked chairs, tables, etc) on Wilson where Mexicali Blues, RiRa, Faccia Luna, etc. are located. I wonder if it was the same three guys.

    • Tabs

      Maybe they were just helping out, in anticipation of the big storms to come this afternoon.

      • Cletus Van Damme

        That’s what I assumed Tabs.

        • Tabs

          the food at Mexicali Blues makes me want to overturn some chairs.

          • Justin Russo

            …as you’re rushing to the WC.

  • Ben

    Held without bond? Was he a flight risk?

    How can they not assume self defense?

  • Ashton Heights

    Why did the police arrest a hero?

  • Ashton Heights

    Thank you Oscar, for defending our neighborhood. Let’s see to it that our Ashton Heights Civic Association will honor you.

    • dave schutz

      Wait a sec – Irving is the border! If this was an odd number, it was Lyon Park. If even, Ashton Heights. We need to know! Bragging rights depend on this!

  • KalashniKEV

    You can get arrested for that?

    • CW

      Apparently. While we don’t have all the facts, it seems somewhat odd. It seems as though the police are treating it as if he went out and just started this fight for the sake of starting it.

      I vote D and am not a huge CCW proponent (just to show that I’m not spewing the NRA party line here), but in my world, a guy who goes out and confronts three criminals in the act, then defends himself when the criminals try to hurt him, is pretty heroic. Maybe I watch too many movies.

      • Joan Fountain

        Or maybe there is more to the story than is being reported by arlnow.

        • Observer

          This is quoted from the report on the police website: “On June 1 at 1:58 am, three subjects were walking south on N. Irving Street vandalizing homes”

          It’s like the opening line to a joke or something.

          Three brahs are walking down the street vandalizing homes…stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

  • George Zimmerman

    I’d have popped a cap in his a$$, but that’s just me.

    • George’s Neighbor

      … cause I never know whether they’re on drugs or about to steal a car or tip over my Crate&Barrel outdoor living room.

  • Use The Internet

    All people are held without bond in VA if they are charged with certain crimes, one of those being Malicious Wounding. It is required.

  • ArlRes

    clarendon = the new adams morgan.

    Anyhow, 2 mins of google reveals tha malicious wounding does require malicious intent (jail can be 5+ yrs). unlawful wounding is a lesser charge (1 yr or so). vandalism if the damage is over $1000 is the same level felony as unlawful wounding, jail term can be around 1 yr. sympathize w/ our raging bull vigilante here, but neck stabbing over vandalism seems a bit much, and I suspect he won’t serve much time if the stabee isnt in too bad shape and he has any kind of self defense claim (which seems he does).

    • brendan

      yeah… from what it sounds like, you’re not going to get a jury to convict someone for this.

    • Jason S.

      If he stabbed in self-defense, that would not be stabbing him over vandalism. It would be stabbing him in response to assault.

  • Douglas Parker

    Well I bet the consequenses of vandalizing property is sufficiently etched into these miscreants minds.

    Probably won’t be doing it again anytime soon.

    I wouldn’t arrest the guy, I’d buy him a beer. As a matter of fact he’d probably make a great neighbor.

    Since the anual d-bags that rifle through the cars on our street never get caught this kinda made my morning.

    • Douglas Parker

      I know it’s afternoon, but I read it in the morning ;)

    • drax

      “As a matter of fact he’d probably make a great neighbor. ”

      Until you walk on his lawn and he stabs you in the neck for trespassing.

      • novasteve

        Maybe if you tried punching him.

      • KalashniKEV

        I guess I’m the worst neighbor. Ever since I hit 30, I just don’t have the dukes for fist-fighting anymore. In fact, if you tried destroying a bunch of my stuff and then assaulted me, I can say with about 99% certainty that I’d shoot you.

        • drax

          Oh, come on, Kev. 100% certainty.

          • KalashniKEV

            I leave that 1% out there for random silly variables like, “OK, what about an old lady hitting you with her purse, and there’s a brick inside…”

    • Ricardo

      Amen. Mauricio Canales is welcome in my neighborhood anytime.

    • Southeast Jerome

      What do anual mean?

  • john lyon park

    I must be missing something. A man (I’m guessing is not young after a quick google search) sees 3 men committing a felony. He arms himself before going outside which seems reasonable. When phsically attacked he acts to protect himself using the weapon which again seems reasonable. Yet he is arrested?

    I’ve never met this man, but he is a neighbor. I home Arlington police can offer more information, because on the surface this seems very unjust.

    • AuroraHighlands

      Amen.

    • KalashniKEV

      This is sending a very bad message to the “newcomers” to the area.

      This is not the kind of VIBRANCY we need…

      • Jason S.

        This is the vibrancy the county and the police support: more petty criminals doing whatever they like.

        • sunflower

          what is your problem??

    • Tabs

      “Mauricio Canales, 27″

    • bc

      I think it’s fair to charge a man for stabbing another man regardless of the circumstances. The police are not interpreters of the law, that’s for the courts. I applaud this man for taking action, but it is not my place, nor the place of police to pass a verdict. To put it another way, what if he had killed a man he had a quarrel with and then threw lawn chairs and plants into the street and said he was confronting the man to stop the vandalism? If the police let him go without charge, we may never go discover the truth. Yes, I know that this story doesn’t involve a murder, but to not charge someone after a stabbing opens a dangerous door where people might believe they can claim self-defense and be released by police without further investigation.

      • Jason S.

        That would be sensible, if they also arrested the vandals. However, they didn’t. ACPD doesn’t care about property crimes, they finally get to feel important by bringing down a guy defending his property. The cops in this county are some of the biggest losers I have ever soon, which is saying quite a bit.

        • drax

          That IS saying quite alot, Jason.

        • jackson

          Don’t know that it was his property. And yes, I bet you have seen your share of losers.

          • sunflower

            love it !!!!

          • Jason S.

            Well, I do live in North Arlington, so of course I see losers all the damned time.

    • Zoning Victim

      Vandalism isn’t a felony unless patio chairs somehow cost $1,000 these days or there was a heck of a lot of them.

      I agree with you that it’s a reasonable human response, but it’s still illegal in Virginia.

      • WeiQiang

        Have you BEEN to Crate&Barrel?

    • drax

      Yes, you’re missing something – the full story.

      This is a brief, third-hand accounting from the police, not a full transcript of testimony from witnesses.

      See the difference?

    • dk

      I must be missing something. A man (I’m guessing not young after a quick google search) sees 3 men committing a felony. He arms himself before going outside?

      Or he could just call the police. Like, say, any sane woman would.

      It is so hilarious how so many men like to think they are John Wayne.

  • Josh S

    The keys words in this entire discussion are: “if” “might” “seems” “may” “could” etc.

    Since the answers to those questions could change points of view dramatically, it seems entirely useless to have any speculative discussion at this point.

    • Bob

      No, it is very informative to speculate. You can fill in various conditions for the unknown variables and discuss the resulting consequences. In fact that is quite educational.

      • Ricardo

        Hmmmm! I hadn’t thought of that.

      • Josh S

        I guess in certain circumstances you are exactly right. The problem is that here, there are too many people who want to use the specualtion as an excuse to blame someone, criticize someone, or judge someone. In addition, everyone seems to assume they are the resident expert.

        The educational value of discussing scenarios is rapidly lost in the resulting scrum….

        • Zoning Victim

          Yeah, but it’s still fun…

        • Bob

          You sound a little too thin-skinned to be on the internet. Just sayin.

          • Josh S

            Perhaps.
            But I do believe in the broken window theory of policing. As it applies to policy / public affairs discussions.

        • WeiQiang

          I like the odd scrum

  • Jim

    Hopefully this gets sorted out. I would hate to think that I live in a jurisdiction where you can’t defend yourself or your property.

    • novasteve

      When the facts are more established, I’m sure Cuccinelli will step in if this mans rights are being abused by some zealot CA who might be siding with criminals over people defending property and their own lives. But we really need to wait for all the facts

      • jackson

        Cuccinelli has his own crusade to worry about.

  • Joey

    I’m not sure on this but if he left his property it may not be self defense.

    • novasteve

      If someone attacks you and you defend yourself, it doesn’t matter where you are. Especially when it’s 3 on 1.

      • Scott

        It doesn’t say 3 guys attacked the other guy. It says one guy swung.

  • KalashniKEV

    Thanks, Views at Clarendon!

    • CW

      Now, now, let’s not confound issues. If his natural flight instinct after being stabbed took him to Bluemont, I highly doubt he lived in the Views, mere blocks away from the crime scene.

      • KalashniKEV

        It’s a contributing factor. Clarendon is going down the tubes.

        • drax

          Yeah, neighborhoods where people confront petty crime with knives in the street are usually slums, while those where they call the cops are usually better.

        • Tre

          Don’t tell that to the home buyers…. $750k gets you a knock down!

          • KalashniKEV

            That’s funny… because you can get in for cheap along with a hefty pinch of MY money over at the Views.

          • drax

            Anyone with a mortgage gets taxpayer money for it through the interest deduction.

          • KalashniKEV

            Why get a mortgage though? You can get a rent subsidy and take it out of the other guy’s pocket. Rent is pretty cheap in comparison to a mortgage payment + condo fee… especially when a good sized chunk of it is payed by your more financially responsible neighbors, to whom you owe nothing and have no commitment to.

  • DG

    Drax,
    You seem to be very hypocritical in your responses. You keep advocating for judgement until AFTER the facts come out, yet you keep mentioning murder, or attempts at killing/murder etc.

    FACT: no one has died yet, he was not charged with murder, or even attempted murder. He was charged with malicious wounding, which means there is no evidence that he tried to, intended to, or in fact murdered anyone.

    You seem to be advocating that the man has done something wrong, but that we should wait for the facts.

    Coming outside with a knife is not in itself a crime. Getting into an argument while holding a knife, is not a crime. Stabbing someone after being attacked (read the part where at least one vandal swung at the man), is not NECESSARILY a crime.

    The majority of the responses here indicate, based on what we know so far, people are upset the man has been charged with anything, while the vandals have not. The facts that have been presented at this point in time, seem to present gross misjudgement by ACPD.

    • drax

      I’m not being the least bit hypocritical. I’m being hypothetical – discussing what might happen in a similar situation, or what might have happened in this case. I’m being very careful to say that I don’t know what actually happened.

  • KalashniKEV

    Wow… lots of folks talking out of their fourth point of contact on this one…

    The “bare fear” of serious bodily injury, or even death,
    however well-grounded, will not justify the taking of human
    life. . . . “There must [also] be some overt act indicative of
    imminent danger at the time.” (citations omitted). In other
    words, a defendant “must wait till some overt act is done[,] .
    . . till the danger becomes imminent.”

    McGhee v. Commonwealth

    • KalashniKEV
      • HayCaramba

        NNAA it’s better to “IF” it out..

      • Zoning Victim

        How can you read the statement below and still believe the charges will be dropped? I can’t believe he isn’t being charged with attempted murder.

        The threat to use deadly force by brandishing a deadly weapon
        has long been considered an assault.
        * * *
        [T]he owner of land has no right to assault a mere trespasser
        with a deadly weapon. (citation omitted). . . . [A] deadly
        weapon may not be brandished solely in defense of personal
        property.

        • John Fontain

          first comes the punch, then comes the weapon. the order of events makes a world of difference.

          • Zoning Victim

            First comes the verbal altercation, which in Virginia makes a big difference for whatever reason.

          • KalashniKEV

            +1 As soon as an overt act was committed, (i.e. Assault) it’s ON LIKE DONKEY KONG.

          • Josh S

            I find your random bursts of ALLCAPS to be endearing somehow. Which is strange…..

          • KalashniKEV

            Wanna go for a bike ride sometime?

        • brendan

          really depends on the details of the confrontation. i’m not a small guy, but if three people physically confronted me and swung first i would interpret that as imminent physical danger. Especially if you do not know the people and don’t know at what point the assault will stop…

  • Clarendon

    Before ArlNow I wonder if most people would have even heard of things like this. I wonder if hyperlocal media has impacted the ability to get an unbiased jury since more and more people are immersed in these stories.

    • CW

      No.

      Yes.

    • KalashniKEV

      Before ARLnow, the guy would have got screwed by the system and then on retelling his tale of woe, someone would probably say, “That can’t be right” or “There must be more to it…”

      Now, thanks to our little town square here on the WWW, the word is out about corrupt local institutions and selective enforcement of laws.

      • Josh S

        Not to mention selective interpretation of events.

      • WeiQiang

        THE MOST CORRUPT institutions

    • drax

      In the old days, we had local newspapers that covered this stuff.

  • Resident

    Think I know this person from his teenage years… great kid. Really. Great. Could totally see him going out to get someone to stop creating problems for his family and/or neighbors.

    Hopefully the evidence will show he was acting in defense.

  • HayCaramba

    126 post and a quick search show the word “IF” has been used over 50 times already in the comments.

  • Jason S.

    That right there is Arlington and Arlington Police in their truest form.

    Three people smashing others’ property are ignored, the guy defending his property (and his person if his claims are true) is arrested.

    • Scott

      if

    • drax

      So you were there, Jason?

      • John Fontain

        I’ll never, ever, till the day I die, understand the small minority of people in this world who defend the acts of criminals like these three low-lifes.

        • John Fontain

          to be clear, that comment is directed at you drax.

        • Josh S

          I’ll never, ever, till the day I die, understand those who jump to conclusions based on a few words they see on the internet.

          • John Fontain

            “based on a few words they see on the internet.”

            ARLnow’s report is based on an interview with ACPD and their understanding of the likely facts in the case.

            And again, I’ll never understand those who go out of their way to defend low life criminals like the three guys doing the property damage in this case. I just don’t get the love affair with crooks and the utter hatred of those who stand up to them.

          • drax

            ALL the likely facts in the case, John?

            This is witnesses talking to cops, and cops talking to a reporter, and a reporter whittling it down. The idea that you think that’s enough to declare them guilty makes hope you never get jury duty.

            “I’ll never understand those who go out of their way to defend low life criminals like the three guys doing the property damage in this case.”

            Show us where anyone has done that.

          • John Fontain

            It’s really not that hard to read between the lines.

          • Josh S

            No doubt, John, no doubt.

            However, there is still no reason to believe that your reading between the lines represents the truth.

            In addition, there is reason to believe that your reading between the lines is frequently far off the mark as you throw out this tripe about people defending criminals or loving crooks, etc. I admit I haven’t read every comment on this thread carefully, but I haven’t seen anyone here do any of that. Instead, what I have seen people do is point out the folly of jumping to conclusions about an event about which you know almost nothing about. I do admit that, on its face, the description provided above does make it seem that there is an imbalance of justice thus far in the story. But a) the story is a long way from being over and b) the version related above is hardly the only version that could be told and since I wasn’t there I have little reason to believe it is the best version. (Hearsay, second-hand news, etc.) Since having this point of view results in skepticism that the seeming injustice is actually injustice, you appear to be concluding that anyone expressing this point of view must therefore be defending criminals. Just a lot of jumping to this conclusion and that conclusion going on, don’t you think?

          • drax

            How DARE the police not arrest people based on me reading between the lines of a brief story on the Internet based on a brief report by police!

        • KalashniKEV

          Some people just love to be the bad guy and side with criminality.

          I pray for them, and that they never learn the error of their ways.

          • cyclist

            “Some people just love to be the bad guy and side with criminality” – like “cleaning cyclists back into their lane with your car” Kev?

          • WeiQiang

            +1: Bollard Award for today

          • KalashniKEV

            If I can make Arlington a little safer by forcing someone to obey the law through passive action, I do it.

          • WeiQiang

            You mean the marked bicycle lane or the lane of vehicular traffic that is not marked specifically for bicycles?

          • CW

            Unfortunately the law in VA does not require cyclists to use a lane solely because it is present.

          • WeiQiang

            From the VA DMV: Bicycles are subject to the same laws as motor vehicles.

            They also have certain rights and duties:

            http://www.virginiadot.org/programs/bk-laws.asp#Rights%20and%20Duties

          • drax

            Some people believe in the basic American principles we fought for 200+ years ago, like only punishing criminals until their guilt is actually proven, in a fair trial.

          • John Fontain

            How many prisoners are you pen pals with?

        • Zoning Victim

          That’s false dichotomy if I’ve ever seen it. Saying you don’t think the actions of the man who confronted these guys constitutes self-defense under Virginia law does not in any way defend the acts of the three idiots that were destroying other people’s property.

          We live in a state that doesn’t even have a Castle Doctrine. Virginia really isn’t big on allowing people to engage in a verbal altercation with someone and then use deadly force once the altercation escalates from verbal to physical. I’d like to see Virginia institute stand your ground laws (or at least expressly allow the use of deadly force in a situation such as this one), but they simply haven’t.

          • KalashniKEV

            +1 Cases like these happen all the time all over the country. The one good thing that I think will come out of Martin/Zimmerman is a sensible, improved SYG law, that is palatable to all citizens, that can be adopted on a state by state basis.

          • John Fontain

            It’s up to you to choose not to read between the lines.

          • Scott

            The 3 vandals are surely that – vandals. They should be held accountable for their property damage crimes.

            We do not know that these vandals committing property damage extrapolates to them also being violent criminals – murderers & rapists. Like it or not the correct response was to call the police and let them handle it and/ or then “go hide under your bed” as stated earlier. The alternative to not doing & deciding you can handle this is called vigilantism. It is a crime to stab people. That is a bigger crime than committing property damage crimes.

          • John Fontain

            Scott, why are you pretending like nothing happened between the vandalism and the stabbing.

          • novasteve

            Not violent? One of them threw a punch.

            Didn’t they just renew VAWA to prevent violence against women, much of which comes from punches? Or are you going to argue punches aren’t violence?

          • KalashniKEV

            It is not a crime to stab people in certain situations.

          • Scott

            I was not there. I do not know what happened other than reading the report here – from that crimes of vandalism took place and then an individual confronted the vandals; a punch was thrown and then one of the vandals was stabbed. I know no more than what is written there. I fully envision all of them will be found to be guilty under the law for their various crimes. I hope the vandals are prosecuted for their property & other crimes. As well the confronting individual we know has been charged with a crime of malicious wounding.

          • KalashniKEV

            Are you saying that you hope the resident gets convicted?

          • Scott

            To keep the theme going, I’m going to do one of these great big if scenarios not at all based in what actually happened.

            If the police were called and had arrived to intercept the vandals– and then one of the vandals threw a punch at the intervening officer it would not be acceptable for the officer to stab with a knife or shoot the vandal.

            As well, I do not think it was acceptable for the individual confronting the vandals to stab any of them. From what has been reported it is my opinion the confronting individual was charged appropriately.

            I think the vandals should also be charged for their respective crimes as well.

    • sunflower

      so sorry you were kicked out of the Academy!!

  • John Fontain

    Based on the fact pattern relayed by police to ARLnow, Mr. Canales is a hero who should be sitting atop a convertible in one of our upcoming parades – not someone who should be behind bars.

    If charges don’t end up getting dropped, I’ll happily chip in to support his legal defense.

    • KalashniKEV

      Me too. VCDL will be involved if these charges are not dropped immediately.

  • Josh S

    What’s really amazing about reading threads like this is how it seems to reinforce the notion that people don’t go on the internet to learn, they go to find things that reinforce their pre-existing point of view……

  • brendan

    Still way too early to say what the deal is…

    Did the altercation take place on his property?

    What was involved in that first ‘swing’? Was he surrounded? Were all three of the vandals engaged in the physical confrontation?

    Unfortunate situation all around, and perhaps stabbing was beyond self-defense… but based on what’s being reported it sounds like the ‘vandals’ made several bad and illegal decisions that led up to this. Again, depends on the details of the confrontation which we don’t have, but can’t imagine a prosecutor even thinking about taking a case like this to a jury. Convicting someone for defending their property after being physically attacked is not something you’d be eager for a jury to weigh, even in arlington. If he was physically confronted by three individuals one of whom threw the first punch, i think that’s more than enough reason to argue imminent danger.

    The three miscreants should certainly be arrested and charged. Doesn’t seem to be much dispute that they were vandalizing private property. Sorry the person got stabbed, but there were at least a half dozen opportunities for him to make a decision to avoid that result.

    • John Fontain

      I’ll bet the police haven’t charged the three low lifes because no one actually witnessed them causing the property damage. Hopefully the police print the items being thrown around. I don’t think they would normally bother to do so, but in this instance, I definitely think they should (Hint, hint ACPD – it’s not too late).

      • Scott

        I bet ACPD is monitoring this thread for hints and clues to what really happened that night.

  • Becoming indifferent

    Maybe the vandals were doing destroying things because of their frustration with the streetcar plan.

    • novasteve

      No, they were upset about healthcare reform!

    • marie antoinette

      +100. That is the biggest joke. When is ArlNow going to start covering THAT disaster? Drax will be working over time!

      • Josh S

        *looking around with a puzzled look on his face*

        Huh?

        • drax

          Let her eat cake.

        • WeiQiang

          To paraphrase, “Forget it. She’s rolling.”

  • Me ke

    A guy came outside = a citizen getting involved and not letting vandals enjoy destruction without consequence. They’ll think twice about pulling that BS again..remember if he didn’t confront them….they wouldn’t get caught and the neighbors would get the repair bill

    • Elmer

      Lesson learned: If vandals are destroyng your house, call a lawyer, then call the police, then ask for comments on Arl.com and if all approve- You may then go outside and protect your property.
      Sheesh!

    • drax

      Sorry, but you may not attack people just because they are committing a crime, even a crime against you. Vandals should have consequences – but that doesn’t give you license to decide the consequences. That’s vigilanteism.

      • MPE

        How does that statement apply to this case?

        • Scott

          Because the guy stabbed one of the vandals

      • marie antoinette

        I think individuals caught in the act of vandalising should be administered a beating on the spot. Then arrested. Then they have their day in court.

        • Robespierre

          Didn’t work out so well for you before…

        • Les miserables

          This is why you were be-headed. No respect for law and order.

      • KalashniKEV

        “Sorry, but you may not attack people just because they are committing a crime, even a crime against you.”

        No… you can.

        • drax

          See, I knew as soon as I posted that, that I should have made it more clear. So here’s my revised version:

          “Sorry, but you may not attack people just because they are committing a crime, even a crime against you, unless of course there is cause, such as self-defense. The act of committing a crime, in and of itself, is not sufficient justification.”

          Better?

      • Elmer

        So show me where I said anything even close to “…you may attack people just because they are committing a crime”.

        Making an assumption again ?

  • Dude Where’s My Car

    “I know what you’re thinkin’, punk. You’re thinkin’, ‘Did he cut me six times, or only five?’ Well to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I’ve kinda lost track myself. But being that this is a Messermeister San Moritz Elite 10-Inch Hollow-Edge Chef’s Knife, the most powerful kitchen knife in the world, and will slice your head CLEAN OFF, you’ve got to ask yourself one question… ‘Do I feel lucky?’

    “Well, do ya, punk?”

    • thelevyisdry

      +1

    • KalashniKEV

      +1

      The gun may fail you, but the blade will never let you down.

    • novasteve

      Can you fly bobby?

  • brian

    ok , why didn’t he call 911?

    • novasteve

      Because maybe he thought it was deer?

      You don’t have a right to police protection in this country.

      • drax

        You don’t have a right to take matters in your own hands when police protection is available though.

        • John Fontain

          How silly. Do you expect to be taken seriously with comments like this?

        • Jason S.

          You actually have the right to step out of your house. Which is what Mr. Canales did.

          • drax

            I didn’t say you don’t have a right to step out of your house.

            You don’t have a right to come out of your house an stab someone unless they threaten you physically first.

            I think we all know this and have covered it well.

    • dk

      I’m going to take wild guess and say it’s because he’s a man.

      • dk

        and by that I mean male. Not necessarily manly.

    • Aaron

      “why didn’t he call 911?”

      Maybe it was because it wasn’t an emergency? Probably because he thought he could just go outside to tell some punks to stop screwing around. That’s what a normal person would do at least. By which I mean not a girl, and by that, I mean female, not necessarily effeminate..

      The situation changed when punks started throwing punches. Unfortunately for them, they didn’t know that their intended victim could fight back.

      • drax

        “Probably because he thought he could just go outside to tell some punks to stop screwing around. That’s what a normal person would do at least.”

        With a knife?

        “Unfortunately for them, they didn’t know that their intended victim could fight back.”

        Even when he had…a knife?

        (This is all speculation, John. It’s okay, we know it).

      • Scott

        There is a non-emergency police phone number as well.

  • WantonTaco

    Ok so where are we at? Guilty? Not guilty? 200 more “IF” comments and we should have it all squared away, but hurry up, storm is coming…

  • JB

    . . . I don’t know all the facts, but I do know a bit about Mauricio – my daughter went to Washington-Lee HS with him and he spent some time at our house. He was, in fact, president of his high school class during his junior year. He was always a sweet, friendly, gentle young man – now we can add brave to that list. I hope for the best for Mauricio . . . .

  • RanomDude

    Props to Mauricio, good job!

    A knife is prob more than they deserved, a good beating would have been more appropriate. Given he was outnumbered, fair game. If you’re dumb enough to try and fight someone with a kitchen knife you might deserve to learn the lesson the hard way.

    If only everyone would react this way, there’d be no BS. If I’d known the little scumbags were coming out to Bluemont, I’d have brought out the salt and vinegar..

    I hope he gets off any charges. I’ll pay for his bar tab when he gets
    out.

  • Roquer

    So, I guess the police know who the vandals are, but arrests aren’t going to be done? Or what?

  • KC_VA

    This sounds like ACPD erred on the safe side by apprehending Mauricio. Wasn’t the questioning and subsequent release of Zimmeran highly criticized for his use of excessive force?

    The time of this incidents would appear like 3 people were rowdy coming home from bars. With this assumption, they were drunkly disturbing chairs and other items in front yards. This is vandalism plan and simple, but what danger did it pose?

    To slash a vandal over this level of destruction could be considered aggressive force. A large knife very close to the jugular (jawline cut location) appears to be a rather extreme way to protecting these items. Who’s to say there are no permanent facial scars.

    Protecting yourself is one thing… but did this incident warrant this type and level of force? Thus, the apprehending of Canales by ACPD.

    Please consider the scenario before I get flamed for this.

    • Agonist

      If someone “disturbs” anything on my property or throws it into the street, I am going to f— them up for sure. To have such disrespect for someone else’s property as to destroy it–people like that are a waste of space.

      Also: three white guys vandalizing the home of a Hispanic guy: Was this a hate crime?

      • drax

        And your cellmate will f— you up later.

      • Josh S

        Let’s get this straight – you think people don’t deserve to exist (i.e., should die, be killed) if they vandalize property?

        There are some laughing fat cats somewhere right now…..

    • Jason S.

      According to the notes here, he stabbed the vandal because the vandal assaulted him.

      • drax

        Yep. Nobody denies the right of self-defense against violence, Jason.

  • No Name

    Mauricio is a buddy of mine. He would only do something like this to defend his house or neighbors. Anyone have any constructive suggestions?? I’m calling my senator and county board members today.

    • drax

      You get to be a character witness. But not an eye-witness.

  • KalashniKEV

    Mauricio is the new Arlington Hero.

  • No Name

    Mauricio is a dear friend of mine and he obviously did something you all would do and protect yourself against some transplants that were being destructive. It would take a lot for anyone to get him agitated and these guys probably did so. He wouldn’t just be knifed up. I too am calling my county board members and state representatives.

    • Jason S.

      *did something you all would do*

      Actually, he didn’t do something “you all” would do. Read these comments, some people would just happily accept the violence against their propert, call the police and be flattered that they were ignored by our county’s finest.

      • Some guy

        Yes, Arlington County is so poorly represented you’d be ignored if you called the police. 911 is a joke yo. Quite the opposite actually. ACPD love busting drunk dudes. They have nothing better going on. A few weeks ago I literally saw 4 or 5 police cars on the scene to take away one drunk dude near the restaurants in Shirlington. ACPD are starving to see any “action” so they race to it. This guy could have called the 5-oh but didn’t.

    • Josh S

      “transplants?”

  • sunflower

    moral: don’t take a knife to a fistfight

    • Richard Cranium

      I think you’ve got that backwards . . .

      • sunflower

        depending on whether you’re worried about getting hurt or getting charged…

    • KalashniKEV

      Moral: The point of having a handgun is to fight your way back to your long gun, the point of having a chef’s knife is for late night Clarendon chair smashing brawler self defense.

  • Alex

    What is up with crime and violence spree in Ballston, Clarendon, Lyon Village, etc? Arlington needs to get on top of this and stop it. Weird.

    • drax

      You’re just hearing more about normal crime because of ArlNow, I speculate.

      • sunflower

        ..and you’re hearing it sooner and in an incomplete state. article was posted 11:30 this a m and first post was 11:32. Ten hours and 300+ posts later and we’re getting the first update. also the ACPD report on their website didn’t completely agree with what arlnow posted. was the difference due to the interviewer or Interviewee, Mr Sternbeck. We can play the game of speculation and get in our clever and/or snarky remarks–but it’s still just a game. and it did generate hits. the final determination is still up to ACPD and the courts.

        • http://www.arlnow.com ARLnow.com

          We reviewed the crime report item and did not find any inconsistencies with the original article or the updated article. To what are you referring?

          • sunflower

            Crime Report: June 1, 2012
            June 01, 2012
            REPORTS
             
             
            MALICIOUS WOUNDING (STABBING), 06/01/12, 800 block of N. Irving Street. On June 1 at 1:58 am, three subjects were walking south on N. Irving Street vandalizing homes when a homeowner confronted them in the street. A physical altercation ensued and one of the subjects was stabbed by a large kitchen knife. The victim sustained non-life threatening lacerations to his chin, forearm and hand, all which required stitches. The resident, Mauricio Canales, 27, of Arlington, VA, was arrested and charged with malicious wounding. He is being held without bond.

            (Updated at 9:10 p.m.) A 27-year-old Arlington man has been arrested after police say he stabbed a man who was vandalizing houses near Clarendon.
            The incident happened just before 2:00 a.m. this morning, June 1, on the 800 block of N. Irving Street. According to Arlington County Police spokesman Dustin Sternbeck, three subjects were vandalizing houses — breaking items and throwing porch chairs and plants into the street — when Mauricio Canales, 27, came outside to confront them.
            At some point Canales — who had been drinking, according to investigators — went back into the house and retrieved a large kitchen knife.
            Canales told police that one of the subjects took a swing at him. Then, police say, he pulled out the knife and stabbed the subject just below the jawline. The subject fled the scene and eventually staggered over to Fire Station No. 2 in Bluemont with a five inch stab wound to his jaw area, along with lacerations to his forearm and hand. The subject was brought to a local hospital and his injuries are considered non-life-threatening, Sternbeck said.
            Police arriving on scene at Irving Street found the bloody knife and the vandalized chairs in the street. Canales was located at his home, wearing a white shirt with blood on it, Sternbeck said. He was arrested, charged with malicious wounding, and is currently being held without bond.
            So far, no charges have been filed against the three alleged vandals.

            unfortunately i no longer have the early version, but there are minor discrepancies, i.e.”a physical altercation ensued” vs. “took a swing at him”. “confronted them in the street” vs. ” came outside to confront them”

          • Scott

            just wow

          • sunflower

            ??

    • CommonCents

      0 homicides in 2011. DC had 108 in 2011. We are separated only by a 1700ft bridge. Take a trip to Chicago or the Mexican border. You have no idea what crime and violence are.

  • Greg

    He has every right to confront people destroying property — I would imagine that most people would move along after being caught, and the fact these punks didn’t leads me to believe there was an element of self-defense involved. Hopefully police are able to find the truth.

    I hope that true justice is served and that these punks are charged and charges against Mauricio are dropped.

    • Elmer

      100%

    • drax

      He has a right to “confront” them, but that doesn’t extend to stabbing them if they don’t leave. He can fight back if they attack him though,

      So…it depends on the details that we don’t know. Which is why we have courts, and trials, and testimony….

  • Each poster is completely wrong

    This would never have happened if Irving street had a street car.

  • http://nationleprechaun.com/ jinushaun

    This guy should get a medal for heroism, not arrested.

  • Go Mauricio

    Sounds like a typical group of the Fairfax douchebags who run hooting and hollering through Clarendon every weekend night at closing time. Maybe they learned a lesson this time: Show some f-ing respect.

  • Dan

    a medal for heroism? really? like I said before.. What makes you guys even know for sure they were the ones who were destroying stuff? he heard a noise and came outside right? How many drunk people walk around the neighborhoods leaving the bars at night? Theres no parking outsie the bars, so people park in neighborhoods and walk. theres no proving the three of them were commiting the crime. In Va its illegal to vandalize. If they werent arrested on the spot theres obviously doubt they did it. Even if they did, stabbing someone a couple times for throwing a lawn chair is dumb. yell at them make them pick it up, call the police, but dont stab someone over it. Medal of honor? wow..

    • apostrophe

      Have you heard of me?

    • drax

      Good post.

    • John Fontain

      “What makes you guys even know for sure they were the ones who were destroying stuff?”

      We don’t know for sure, but sometimes life requires the use of at least a smidgen of common sense. If you hear noises of destruction outside your house and walk out and see three guys standing in your yard, lots of broken stuff, and no one else around, I’d say it’s a pretty good chance that the only three guys present are the ones responsible. The odds increase if you see them with property in their hands or witness them doing damage.

      “Even if they did, stabbing someone a couple times for throwing a lawn chair is dumb.”

      You missed several steps in the chain of cause and effect – such as when the homeowner was attacked by one of the three vandals. But if the only way to make your point is to pretend the vandal was stabbed because he tossed a lawnchair, then go for it. It’s laughably weak.

  • Dan

    ?

    • apostrophe

      6 instances of theres (there’s), 2 instances of werent (weren’t), 2 instances of dont (don’t) in your two postings.
      You owe me 10 ‘.
      That is all.

      • sunflower

        probably has an I-pad. i gave up apostrophes when i got mine. too hard to do capitals and apostrophes when you have to h & p rather than touch type. i usually make an effort to use them on arlnow so i dont get jumped on by such as you. ; – /

  • Dan

    Really? You know what I meant, did you not? There’s someone in jail, one person was stabbed, and all of them are being accused of things. Meanwhile, your correcting grammar?

  • Joe M.

    Based on the police report, it seems like the resident confronting the 3 drunks started the altercation. You guys are all calling this guy a hero, when it hasn’t been determined 1) that he even confronted the right people (i.e: were these the vandals?), or 2) who was more responsible for the altercation?

    Arlington is one of the most educated places on the planet, but there are a lot of posters showing a bit of ignorance of civics, the presumption of innocence, and due process of law.

    I don’t know who did what and so I’ll wait for the Authorities to determine guilt or innocence, but if the point of arresting people is for public safety, I think the fact that the guy who took a kitchen knife to someone’s neck is in jail, and the drunk and disorderlies aren’t is probably not a bad thing.

    • Looking in,

      You must have missed the part of the report where it says the person confronting the vandals went back into his house and came out with the kitchen knife, then the person stabbed the vandal after the vandal threw the punch at him.
      The vandals did not have sense enough to leave after the inital confrontation over their vandalizing the neighborhoods property and instead hung around to fight the guy when he returned from his house with a kitchen knife?
      Those three vandals must go by the aliases: dumb, dumber and dumbest, either that or there’re the three stooges.

    • Not a whimp

      So the next time I and two of my buddies are “drunk and disorderly” we can come over to your house and vandalize it without fear of being confronted by you.

      • Scott

        that’s an excellently crafted point

      • drax

        If that’s what you got from that post, you’re sadly mistaken.

    • dk

      +1

      It is mind boggling that so many posters appear to be arguing that drunks throwing lawn chairs into the street are a bigger threat to public safety than a drunk wielding a knife and stabbing someone in the throat.

    • drax

      “Arlington is one of the most educated places on the planet, but there are a lot of posters showing a bit of ignorance of civics, the presumption of innocence, and due process of law.”

      That only scratches the surface.

      • sunflower

        better look for your super race candidates elsewhere

  • my2cents

    i’m still baffled why the guy that swung wasn’t arrested out of the 3…my guess is they are white. (this post is made by a white guy…)

    • CommonCents

      My guess is that the guy never even swung– it probably just seemed like the thing to say when you’re caught red handed with a bloody knife and t-shirt. Maybe there were conflicting statements, or maybe he didn’t even know which of the 3 swung at him. But just because you don’t know the answers, it’s pretty ignorant to conclude he wasn’t arrested because he was white. All the dollars and no cents.

    • John Fontain

      Maybe he’s are well connected.

      • John Fontain

        scratch the ‘are’

  • sunflower

    these aren’t the vandals that sacked Rome, after all. That said, since the police report says they were “vandalising homes”, I’m sure we’ll subsequently hear more about them.

  • George Z

    Were they wearing hoodies? It was a cool night outside.

  • Dan

    “Canales told police that one of the subjects took a swing at him” of course he told the police that. He stabbed the guy! The entire story shows one police statement. You can only read Canales side of the story, where are the other three statements?
    “We don’t know for sure, but sometimes life requires the use of at least a smidgen of common sense. If you hear noises of destruction outside your house and walk out and see three guys standing in your yard, lots of broken stuff, and no one else around, I’d say it’s a pretty good chance that the only three guys present are the ones responsible. The odds increase if you see them with property in their hands or witness them doing damage.”
    It says there were three subjects vandalizing houses Mauricio went outside to confront them ( it didn’t say if it was his house it was just outside) He then went back inside grabbed a knife and went back outside. Who is to say that they didn’t run away and when he came back outside there were three completely different guys walking back to their cars from the bar? Canales was drunk, people are retarded when they are drunk. I’ve heard of weirder things happening.
    Nowhere in the story do we see any facts. All of us are going off of one statement they posted. All we know for sure is that Canales was arrested for stabbing someone. The other three according to the story have no charges against them. Everyone is hating on the cops saying how horrible they are and they will arrest you for anything. Then why didn’t they arrest the alleged vandals? They are either trying to build up a case against them? They have no proof or evidence against them. Or the “alleged vandals” were in the wrong place at the wrong time. We don’t know the full story.

    • John Fontain

      “Who is to say that they didn’t run away and when he came back outside there were three completely different guys walking back to their cars from the bar?”

      Are you serious? Why would you assume unlikely fact patterns to be probable of occurence?

      “Canales was drunk”

      Please substantiate this assertion. The police PR says he was drinking, but doesn’t describe his level of intoxication.

  • Rsmith35

    “Believe only half of what you see and NONE of what you here” None of you were even there to really know what happened both sides could be lying to save themselves but regardless getting stabbed for vandalism is way out of line. The” DRUNK” should have called the police to handle the situation. obviously they were young adults so imagine if your child was out goofing off and you got a call saying that they were stabbed ” for allegedly vandalism” take a minute and look at the whole equation here VANDALISM< STABBING

    • John Fontain

      “getting stabbed for vandalism”

      That’s a ridiculous way to describe what happened because, as you well know, the vandal was not stabbed for vandalism, he was stabbed for attacking the homeowner.

      Since you are well aware of what actually happened, please explain why you are going out of your way to misrepresent the facts.

      • Dan

        No one actually knows what happened. The full story has not been posted even though you seem to think it has. All this is, is people arguing over what Canales’s said. I was wrong for saying he was drunk. I knew that as soon as I sent that. I should have just said he was drinking even so, drinking at all hinders judgment. Do we even know the attack was outside of his house? Maybe he saw three people down the street and assumed it was the same three. It doesn’t say he witnessed them chair in hand or anything like that. You are taking what Canales said as the absolute truth. I am just playing devil’s advocate. I want to know the truth as much as you do. I’m just not so ready to accuse three people of doing something we don’t know they did.

      • Rsmith35

        Your right John. I forgot you were at the incident please share with us EXACTLY what you saw?

        • John Fontain

          You were the one who asserted that the homeowner stabbed someone solely because they vandalized property when in fact the stabbing occurred after the vandal attacked the homeowner (as per the police statement). Again, I find it extremely interesting that you show up on this website and your first post is made to defend the vandals by deliberately misrepresenting the facts as relayed by police. What’s your motivation to do so?

          • Scott

            It is very interesting that your opinion of what took place in this event is not exactly the same as mine. Please explain why that is.

      • Scott

        And what are the facts John?

        The guy was stabbed for his acts of vandalism.

        One guy who had been drinking stabbed another guy who had been drinking. The guy who committed the stabbing said one guy swung. Of course he said that– he just stabbed someone in defense of some potted plants and patio chairs.

        • John Fontain

          Yep, it had nothing at all to do with anything that happened in between the vandalism and the stabbing. You’re right, we’ll all just pretend there were no intermediate events.

          • Scott

            Didn’t say that it had nothing to do with vandalism. It had everything to do with the vandals property crimes.

            I said the individual that stabbed the other did so because of this; he’s a big man and he’s going to defend this damaged property (not self) by stabbing this person who he feels committed the property crimes; and he’d been drinking.

          • John Fontain

            “Didn’t say that it had nothing to do with vandalism.”

            I’ll write this slowly for you. Stop intentionally ignorning the intermediate events (i.e., the vandals attack on the homeowner). It looks silly on your part to pretend as if the stabbing was due solely to lawn chairs being tossed about.

          • Scott

            Not a fact = i.e., the vandals attack on the homeowner

          • John Fontain

            Nothing is a fact yet, I guess. But the larger point still stands, you made a ridiculous claim that the stabbing was solely due to lawn chairs being tossed around even though that clearly isn’t the case.

          • Scott

            “Nothing is a fact yet, I guess. …even though that clearly isn’t the case.”

            What is clearly the case then?

            The homeowner was “attacked” by 3 people and walked away without a scratch? Seems legit

          • YES!

            Absolutely legit. Most people loose their desire to fight once they see someone get stabbed in the throat.

            I particularly like the way that you’re more than willing to accept the fact that they were committing vandalism based on report/witness statements, and yet seemingly unable to accept that he was attacked which is stated in the very same report/by the same witnesses. Nobody is going to side with you as long as you pick and choose your facts.

          • Scott

            Nevermind that the “report” being referenced here over and over is summary information from the arrest report of Mr. Canales. Mr. Canales was arrested and is in jail. The report referenced that Mr. Canales stated one person swung at him is noted in his arrest report. That statement was known and taken into account– and then he was arrested.

            Whether or not random folks on an Internet message board are convinced matters little. With the information that ACPD gathered, they deemed it appropriate to place Mr. Canales under arrest for his crime. He’s now sitting in a jail cell for stabbing someone.

      • A Beberman

        From the article, Canales cleary wasn’t fearful of his life – “went back into the house and retrieved a large kitchen knife.”

        You are only allowed to defend yourself with a deadly weapon if you are fearful of your life being taken, and there is no other alternative for you to get away from someone trying to kill you. It seems he had many other alternatives besides stabbing someone in the jaw area.

        • John Fontain

          It seems to me the vandals had many other alternatives besides vandalizing and attacking a homeowner.

          I often wonder whether people like you will stop defending the criminals if and when you ever become a victim.

          • Dan

            “I often wonder whether people like you will stop defending the criminals if and when you ever become a victim.”
            I would much rather defend the person who we know was stabbed than the person who claims a drunk guy swung at him.
            “when in fact the stabbing occurred after the vandal attacked the homeowner (as per the police statement).”
            It was in the police statement, yes. However it is put in the statement as Canales said. Not that it actually had happened. Also, why is it ok for you to assume that more things happened in between Canales seeing the vandals and stabbing the guy but it’s not ok for me to make an assumption that the original three vandals fled the scene when he went inside and when he came back out he saw a completely different group and ran to them and sliced a guy’s throat? Sure one is more likely but really we are all just assuming. Why don’t you wait till you have all the facts?

          • Scott

            “I often wonder whether people like you will stop defending the criminals if and when you ever become a victim.”

            Fact 1. Canales has been charged with a crime of malicious wounding for stabbing another person.
            2. He is in jail.
            3. You are defending a criminal.

          • John Fontain

            Funny to hear the same people who say ‘innocent until proven guilty’ call the homeonwer a criminal even though he hasn’t been proven guilty. Truly classic!

          • Scott

            This seems to be directed to me but I’ve said throughout it sounds appropriate to me the whole lot should be charged for their respective property crimes & stabby crimes. Then its in the courts hands.

          • Scott

            Got it. Under your logic fail you repeatedly refer to the “vandals” as criminals “even though they’ve not even been proved guilty?” While saying to call the guy arrested for stabbing someone and sitting in jail his crime is too far a leap for you to call him a criminal.

          • A Beberman

            The vandals may have broken the law. If so, they should be arrested or charged with a crime.

            I am not defending any criminals. But no one has the right to use a deadly weapon on someone unless their life is in imminent danger, and they have no other means to escape a dangerous situation.

            A court of law will have to decide if Canales’ life was in fact in imminent danger and if he could not avoid the situation that occured.

          • Josh S

            It’s fairly amazing that 300+ posts and 3 days later, you still can’t see the points others are trying to make and how they are not the same thing as “defending the criminals.”

  • drax

    It’s too bad we don’t have, like, a court system, with procedures and stuff for figuring out what actually happened.

  • Free Canales

    we need him out of jail.

    • Bill

      We need a contact to make donations to bail him out and help with his defense.

      • Scott

        No bail has been set.

        “He was arrested, charged with malicious wounding, and is currently being held without bond.”

  • jackson

    Don’t mind me. Just adding one comment to make it an even 400…

  • John Fontain

    Update: I’m happy to report that Mr. Canales is out on bail and has hired one of the most prominent local defense attorneys.

    • Free Canales

      USA USA!

  • and one more

    Ballston patch dot com had a little different write up on this –has sort of the key quote from the police spokesman though–

    “It doesn’t matter whether he was defending his property or not,” Sternbeck said. “He confronted them, decided to go back into the house and grab a kitchen knife, and come out and stab a dude in the face.

    He continued: “Call it what it is. We tell the public always: Please, call police if you’re witnessing crimes occurring, and do not take it into your own hands. And you can see what some of the results can be.”

  • Flyover Country

    Seems like the dust has settled some, so time to stir the pot. So hard to chose what statement is the most ridiculous. Well, since its the previous post, it’s hard to imagine an actual police spokesman for the ACPD using “dude” in a statement to the press – as in “…and come out and stab a dude in the face….” What, was he talking on the Jon Stewart show? But moving on to the idea that being charged with a crime makes you a criminal, ah no. Otherwise, there would be no need for a court system. Or perhaps this may help, for example Megans law only applies to those convicted, not charged.

    As for the use of deadly force, current law in VA requires reasonable fear of GBH to you or others, but that is getting to be a minority position as the Castle Doctrine and related laws are adopted in more and more states. In fact, Castle Doctrine legislation has been introduced probably the last few years in the VA General Assembly, and IMNSHO its only a matter of time until its adopted.

    But it has been my experience that ACPD responds quickly and in force to distress calls. Plus, in this day those bozos alleged to have been trashing folks property should have been caught on a dozen surveillance cameras, or if not, this kinda nonsense will be soon (coming to a neighborhood near you “dropcam” – very easy and effective).

×

Subscribe to our mailing list