Cops Corral Murder Suspect

Not a lot of recreation going on…

The Fullerton police say they have nabbed the suspect who stabbed and killed a homeless man on south Fullerton’s “recreation trail” a few nights ago. The suspect’s name is Abigail Jorge Gonzalez-Castillo, a 29-year-old male from Fullerton, which sounds weird since I have never heard of a man with the name Abigail.

Anyway, the cops believe they have their man but at this point we don’t have any other details, such as if the two – victim and alleged killer – knew each other, and why both happened to be recreating on the “trail” in the wee hours of the morning – one seemingly passed out and the other wandering by. Apparently these gentlemen were unaware that Fullerton parks and trails are closed at night.

The City seems hell bent on expanding recreational facilities in the unsafest part of Fullerton, but this incident and the subsequent arrest will have commonsensical people asking whether this concept isn’t intrinsically flawed. Too bad commonsense and Fullerton City Hall are two nouns rarely used in the same sentence.

61 Replies to “Cops Corral Murder Suspect”

  1. “hell bent on expanding recreational facilities”

    Gah! Monsters!

    There’s a massive difference between a weedy ally (what the Phase 2 trail now) and a park with a paved big trail and trees.

    It can all go to shit if unmaintained. That’s an important but separate issue. Just like our streets. No one says we shouldn’t I have streets. But they have to be maintained.

    ” will have commonsensical people asking whether this concept isn’t intrinsically flawed”

    I don’t think so, because well lit, landscaped trails with paved bike lanes are better than unmaintained vacant lots.

    But heck, maybe I’m overthinking it. Bring on the commonsensical people that think trails are intrinsically flawed.

    1. What’s the “massive” difference?

      I think you meant distinction without a difference.

      There are literally hundreds of homeless encampments on public land throughout the state, nearly all of which are lighted and have trees.

      The facts on the ground do not support your argument.

      1. “What’s the “massive” difference?”

        If an area is looks abandoned people will assume the law is less likely to be enforced there.

        “There are literally hundreds of homeless encampments on public land throughout the state, nearly all of which are lighted and have trees.”

        Yes. I am not making the case that lighting and landscaping solves homelessness.

        Housing, law enforcement, health care and social work solve homelessness.

        That, and hooking sprinklers to a random timer. Not many homeless at Acacia park for that reason.

        But unless you’re saying we cannot have public parks unless homelessness is solved I guess you’re just arguing against parks and trails altogether. I reject that.

        “The facts on the ground do not support your argument.”

        Facts on the ground. Funny.

        1. “But unless you’re saying we cannot have public parks unless homelessness is solved I guess you’re just arguing against parks and trails altogether. I reject that.”

          Jesus Christ, your arguing with yourself. Does that happen a lot?

            1. It happens occasionally. In fact it’s happening right now. Dr. Schwartzman has been struggling valiantly to stch us back together, but I, for one am not sure I really want to be us anymore. Also in fact, we’re not even sure if Dr. Schwartzman is a figment of my imagination, so there’s that.

        2. You don’t get it. The City should be planning for the whole area at the same time – not piecemeal shit that is bound to fail. You may not care about wasting 2 million but people here do. You don’t seem to grasp that in your knee-jerk defense of whatever make-work idiocy the city bureaucrats are scheming to do. You and Jan Flory may think the managers in city hall are the “heart” of the city, but you are both way wrong.

          1. First it’s grant money. The city’s portion is on the order of 300K.

            Second I don’t know what there is to “get”. Is the whole area open for redevelopment? There’s a piece of land available for use as a landscaped, lit, paved, bike trail. What else is on the table?

            1. Lots of things are on the table if you don’t have your head up your rectum. Remember the JMI Transportation Center model? Bet not. You government cheerleaders have such conveniently short memories.

              I’m glad to know you think grant money is free. Typical liberal bullshit. And how about spending that $300,000 on our existing parks?

        3. “If an area is looks abandoned people will assume the law is less likely to be enforced there.”

          Supporting an assumption with another assumption.

          Most illogical. You need to support your claims with facts.

            1. https://news.northeastern.edu/2019/05/15/northeastern-university-researchers-find-little-evidence-for-broken-windows-theory-say-neighborhood-disorder-doesnt-cause-crime/

              W-i-d-e-l-y disproven.

              In fact, the evidence suggests Mr. Wilson’s theory provided the necessary pseudo-intellectualism needed to justify abusive law enforcement practices that disproportionally targeted racial and ethnic minorities in urban environments.

              Curious, why do you insist on defending the indefensible? Logic dictates you should have something better to do with your time.

              Logic also dictates that when all other options have proven to be impossible, the remaining solution, no matter how improbable, must be correct.

              Are you, in fact, a lizard person?

              The total lack of an explanation for your illogical comments leaves few alternatives available to justify the observed behavior.

    2. Except that the murder took place in “Phase 1” the already improved part (allegedly) therefore, once again, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Please get in touch with Alice Loya for your talking points. It won’t make anymore sense but at least you can blame her for the nonsense.

      BTW, given your intellectual equipment, you are certainly “overthinking it.”

      1. “Except that the murder took place in “Phase 1” the already improved part (allegedly)”

        Yes, I know. I’m not claiming that lighting and landscaping and a bike trail make crime impossible.

        I’m saying cleaning up an abandoned lot, adding lighting is going to make it usable for legitimate public purposes and make crime there LESS likely. That is different from impossible.

        As far as Loya, I am interested to know the status of UP Park. Or I may drive by and see.

        You are persisting in blaming the trail/location for a murder. Just the wrong tree. Homeless and law enforcement and management of the parks would be the right tree.

        1. Nobody is blaming the City’s botched UP acquisition of toxic land and wasted millions for the murder. Instead we are saying why waste more millions in this shooting gallery?

          Yes by all means drive by what some people are still calling “UP Park.” Enjoy the dead grass and the chain link fence. You might even try getting out of that car and check out the neighborhood instead of just nattering about things you know nothin about. And for fuck’s sake, take Alice Loya with you. And leave her there. Let’s see if she can find her way back to City Hall.

          1. ” You might even try getting out of that car and check out the neighborhood”

            Yeah that’s what I meant by driving by.

            Every park is a potential “shooting gallery” if left unmaintained and the law unforced.

            That’s where your energy would be more welcome instead of trying to prevent parks from happening in the first place.

            1. Imagine trying to police a long, narrow park crammed between industrial buildings, spanning multiple blocks, lined with junkies, campers and borrachos.

  2. What a great idea; spend $2MM and don’t plan out the future of the surrounding area! After all this isn’t Anaheim or Brea. It’s good enough for Fullerton. And the best part is it will give Staff plenty to do!

  3. As someone who actually lives in this neighborhood within 40 yards of where this murder took place, I really draw exception to the way some are using it to justify blocking the trail expansion. Here are some quick points:

    1) There was a real human being here who was loved and murdered. I saw friends and family weeping at the site over the following days. He wasn’t a cheap political point.

    2) This neighborhood is starving for safe recreational areas. We drive our daughter miles away instead of getting to use the park right across the street that is fenced off because FPD somehow can’t keep it safe. That’s shameful. But even without that, there just isn’t much around. For those of us who run/bike, it’s about a mile to the nearest (actual) trail. Lemon Park is close by but a bit of a hike for a small park (with its own issues, too).

    3) Building without a plan for safety doesn’t actually solve for #2, but the cardinal rule of urban planning is you NEVER pass up an opportunity to acquire land or rights of way. If you build it now, you always have the option to make it better in the future… and like I said, we’ll continue to be in desperate need.

    One other thought: FPD detectives deserve a major round of kudos for the quick solve here. Unhoused victims of color rarely get justice and I’m glad that’s not the case here. At the same time… I’ve rarely if ever seen FPD patrols down here on FOOT. If you want a quick solve for improving safety in this walkable neighborhood and along a future trail, getting some more foot patrols in public areas where cars don’t actually go would be a major boon.

    1. “This neighborhood is starving for safe recreational areas.”

      “Starved.” Really? You could go to Richman Park. It’s about three blocks away. The FPD could mount a 24/7 guard at the Poison Park and add folly to folly by building a “trail” through the industrial/junk yard/tire storage/metal stripping/asphalt businesses. Bet you would just love to take your kids along that back to nature experience.

      Oh, and BTW FPD is never going to get their cops out of cars. It doesn’t work that way. But maybe you could take that up with Ahmad Zahra to see how far you get.

      1. Um…I already do take my kids past all that, plus encampments and open drug use in broad daylight, regardless of which path to take to any park, unless I’m driving. So I’m hard pressed to see how the trail would make things worse.

        Very open to alternative suggestions for the space but from where I sit this is a low cost deposit on long term optionality, or a higher cost investment in better livability. Either way it’s worth doing. The one concern I do have (I’m coming at this open minded not as an ideologue) would be a high cost short term investment that isn’t actually matched by investments in security.

      1. No, I rent – as do the vast majority of millennial parents in Southern California. I also believe this is true of most of our neighbors in this immediate vicinity regardless of age but I could of course be mistaken there.

        We are hopeful to buy in the near future once the market settles and feel fortunate to have it even distantly within reach.

        1. If you owned property on Truslow you might have a different view of the matter. As in property values. What the City built there has been an impediment to redevelopment, not an asset, which is exactly the same nonsense Alice Loya, the overpaid bungler, is still pitching. The problem with this entire area is too little private sector investment and too much patronizing City Hall fuck-ups.

  4. Thanks for the lecture on urban planning. How long are you going to wait for government to solve your problems? Here’s a hint: It’s not going to get better.

  5. “but the cardinal rule of urban planning is you NEVER pass up an opportunity to acquire land or rights of way. If you build it now, you always have the option to make it better in the future… and like I said, we’ll continue to be in desperate need.”

    Oh dear, oh dear, or dear. What a cardinal recipe for wasting money, especially other people’s money. And no accountability. It’s a foolproof formula for assuring nobody ever has to take the heat for fucking anything up, because – we were always planning on making it better in the future!!

    Go to Lemon Park. Got to Richman Park. Go to Amerige Park. Go to Woodcrest Park. Go to Independence Park. Go to Nicolas Park. A five minute drive will take you up to Hillcrest Park (watch out for the pervs) or Hiltscher Trail – something that at least has a natural character.

    And then please quit spouting clichés about you parks poor neighborhood. Fullerton’s parks belong to everybody.

  6. We do go to most of those parks. Wouldn’t replace having access within a five minute walk.

    We’re also not waiting on anyone to do anything for us – but for what it’s worth, government has done a great deal for me in my life and I’m immensely grateful and happy to pay taxes in turn, especially for well run services or good investments. We’re also not talking about some distant entity here… this is local government and it consists of you and me. Don’t think it’s well run, make it better.

    And yes, that is a cardinal rule of urban planning. You have a chance to grab land at low cost without displacement, you do it almost every single time. This is actually an interesting use case because there ARE potential drawbacks: if FPD can’t be bothered to get out of their cars and there’s no concurrent improvement in homeless services, it becomes worse for residents, not better.

    1. Unfortunately, the over riding issue here is that the City of Fullerton is essentially bankrupt. Even if we pay for the trail with “free” money (it’s not free), it’s rarely 100% of the cost of the project. The balance needs to come out of the city budget. Another major issue is that all these projects are built with great fanfare but the city doesn’t tell you that we really don’t have any money for upkeep.

      Look at the bait and switch rebuilt “duck pond” at Hillcrest Park. I grew up going to the duck pond many decades ago when It was an actual duck pond. The pictorial rendering of the proposed pond shows actual water. Go look at the final, as built, “pond”. It’s a meandering stream, not a pond.

      Now, don’t get me wrong, aside from the builder forgetting about the “pond” part, it does look nice. For $1.2M, it should. But come back in 5 years and all that nice looking riparian landscaping will be mostly gone and if we have a especially wet year, it will likely be gone overnight. And there wont be any money to replace much of anything like it is now.

      At the moment, I’d much rather see the money spent on infrastructure. You know roads, water mains, sewer, etc. If the money in the city budget is legally set aside for only parks, use it for park maintenance.

      We really can’t afford more parks when we can’t even maintain those we have.

      1. Exactly on point! Let’s take Phase 1 of the alleged “trail.” It’s full of weeds, dead plants and garbage. The City can’t take care of what it already has and wants to build more stuff with “free” money. But the maintenance wouldn’t be free. The water won’t be free either – although the parkocrats won’t be getting a bill. But the citizens will be paying for it alright, and paying a lot for the MWD water.

        1. What’s funny is that even though the City has given no indication that they can or will attend to the facilities they already wasted millions on, dummies like Hoogerhuise insist that more money be thrown in the same direction, just, ya know, cuz….blind faith.

          This other guy “Charlie” wants a park across the street from his rental house with the proviso that it be safe and clean and patrolled by cops walking a beat. He’s planning on moving when he can afford it, so the idea of another park filled with junkies isn’t all that big of a problem.

          1. This is a really weird comment, as is your other above. Renters use parks… that’s a pretty normal thing in American cities.

            I already live across from a vacant park with junkies making it unsafe to bring my toddler. I can afford to move elsewhere now, I choose to live here because of many other attributes this community has that outweigh the bad. But to think I don’t care to fix it enough that I’d raise her here longterm is just weird.

            Also, I suggest you check out actual rental prices in the area before assuming property values are not going up regardless. A functional park and trail in place of what exists today would almost surely accelerate that.

            1. “A functional park and trail in place of what exists today would almost surely accelerate that.”

              And what on God’s Green Earth makes you assume a park and trail would be “functional?” The park that WAS THERE WASN’T FUNCTIONAL.

              “FUNCTIONAL” A weasel word if ever I heard one. The submarine was functional except for all the holes in it.

              You’ll hit the brick as soon (if ever) you can. Your stake in this neighborhood is ephemeral.

              1. I don’t understand your point. I say the current “park” is an issue I don’t want repeated, and all you’ve done is attack my opinion as unqualified to count despite actually living here.

                My stake in this neighborhood is that I live here and want to keep living here. Do with that as you may. And, really mean this – try to be a bit nicer in life. Not everyone who mildly disagrees with you about parks and rec is a mortal enemy.

      2. This is a thoughtful, respectful, and rational response, and you make good and persuasive points. Seems like it should be the norm but just want to say thanks for approaching a civics discussion with civility.

        I don’t know enough of the city budget to understand if it’s truly an either or scenario on existing maintenance or not, as you suggest. For my part, it’s hard not to notice real disparity in parks experience across different neighborhoods and my instinct is that more parks spending south of the tracks is something I’d welcome. But I appreciate your perspective here for sure.

    2. Charlie, you are misinformed. The City already owns the land. The issue at hand is whether we want a piecemeal approach to redeveloping the industrial corridor. Any future redevelopment of the area will no doubt include a public right-of-way from Harbor to Independence Park. Don’t let the tail wag the dog. And, a lot of housing could be built around a pedestrian right-of-way. It’s foolish to waste over $2MM now when a developer will provide the improvements as part of a well planned Master development. Don’t fret, there will be subsidized housing for people like you to leach off.

      1. That’s very well said. The City issued an RFQ for a master developer for this area in 2017. Our staff recently claimed that there were 3 qualification statement received by the City but that the council somehow changed course – behind closed doors (which, if true is illegal). That sounds like Fitzgerald and Domer spiked the idea for their own purposes.

        How much of this story is true is unknown. But and RFQ was issued that could have brought an immense amount of private sector development into the area without a nickle of public subsidy.

        I guess I’ll have to do a follow up post about that sham.

      2. Why do you assume I live in subsidized housing (not that this is a bad thing) or that I leach off anyone? I probably pay more in rent each month than most Fullerton homeowners do on their mortgage.

        Honestly, I’m otherwise persuaded by lots of what you suggest here – especially the use of a master developer and the actual alternative it presents for the neighborhood, even moreso if it involves limited displacement. But your assumptions about me and my neighbors speaks pretty poorly of your actual concerns for the people who live here and makes me question the rest of what you state.

        1. Apparently you aren’t au currant with you “planners” in City Hall. They produced an RFQ for a master developer for the area just like they did for the Transportation Center. Then they torpedoed it because they don’t really give a shit about you. They give a shit about job security and their exorbitant pensions. And that’s all there is to it.

        2. If I were you I’d be worried about the assumptions City Hall planners make about you and your neighbors. You will soon get a chance to support a master planner-type concept at a City Council meeting. I wonder if you would really support it.

          1. Honestly probably would, though would need to see details.

            You all make assumptions about me or others based on the mildest of disagreements. Seriously – try to restore some civility to how you engage with your neighbors.

            1. You may have a chance to support the idea of a broad vision approach on 9/17 at the CC meeting.

              I’ve heard through several sources that recirculating the 2017 RFQ for this area is going to be on the agenda. This process doesn’t start any specific planning – rather it is a selection process for a master developer with a private sector vision. Working out an eventual agreement would take months and undoubtedly would entail public outreach. If the City fails to go this route I fear that you will never get a real shot at cleaning up the mess decades of neglect have caused.

              Some of your earlier comments (quite politely stated) lead me and others to believe you have faith in the Fullerton government to competently address issues that affect this area. I assure you they do not care about making things work. Perception and activity and job security are their goals. As Old Doc HeeHaw once said, “perception is reality in the minds of our residents.”

            2. Charlie, I would be very interested in hearing what you think about all this – from City Hall plans to multiple stabbings, parking, downtown mayhem, police, etc.

              I think the perspective of a Truslow resident would be pretty illuminating. If you feel inclined, please write an essay on any subject you like and we will be happy to publish it under the name “Charlie” or anything else you like. Remember, 2 former City Councilmen got their start writing for FFFF.

              1. Charlie:

                I’d seriously consider taking Mr Harpoon’s offer to write a post for FFFF as I’m sure there are many here who would be very interested in your views. Unlike far too many people who comment here, you come across as someone who really is interested in civil discourse and who isn’t afraid of actually considering other viewpoints. Thanks for your comments.

  7. This is a strange blog post. Why is anyone talking about city planning when we just had human being murdered in his sleep? Why is this poor victim being used for political games?
    We still have killer cops on the FPD and homeless people being murdered. Who cares about a trail?
    So much money has been given to this city for homeless programs, housing, mental heath. But nothing has changed. Does this blog only care about the homeless when it has a vendetta against the city?
    Remember when Friends “shut down” the blog right in the middle of the Kelly Thomas murder trail against the FPD? It sure did sound like it was gone forever or just until the smoke cleared from the killers being set free.
    There is no time like right now to clean house. So what are we waiting for?
    To the victims family. I am sorry for what happened to your son. No one deserves to go like that.
    He wasn’t just some “homeless dude.”

    1. To me he was a “homeless dude.” I don’t write fond obituaries of people I don’t know. That’s what friends and family are for. But if you want to write one up and send it in, I’ll be happy to post it. In the meantime I will replace the word “dude” with something less casual.

  8. Unless this Abigail guy confesses there’s so way they make this case. That picture could be anybody and it seems like there were no witnesses around.

    FPD will fuck it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.