M-O-M dismissed

An update on the Mom that was busted in August for chauferring her son around to graffiti.

The charges against Victoria Villicano were dropped “in the interest of justice,” but her 20-year-old son was prosecuted for spraying graffiti along Sunset Boulevard in late August, said Jane Robison, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.

I’m glad the charges were dismissed. I thought it was a little silly for the LAPD to bust her, even if it wasn’t the smartest thing to do.

CategoriesUncategorized

37 Replies to “M-O-M dismissed”

  1. Oooo, you’re serious Heather? Gonna have to disagree with ya there then. First off I don’t know WTF “in the interest of justice” means as a reason for dropping the charges. Second, I don’t find the LAPD at all “silly” for arresting her basically in the act of transporting her son and his co-vandals as they tagged up the Silver Lake area. I will agree that condoning and supporting such egregious behavior “wasn’t the smartest thing to do,” especially since she’s a parolee on a previous drug conviction. Hell I’d even go so far as to say it was “silly.” And much worse.

  2. No, bust her stupid a%# to, she’s just adding
    to the problem, next time maybe she’ll drive the
    car during a drive by, or a 7-11 holdup, wonder
    what her delinquent son will get her for mother’s day, a can of paint? come on.

  3. I think sticking it to the parents would be great. She should have been held responsible as well. Had it been another teen driving, probably would’ve been strung up as well.

  4. So graffiti is now a gateway drug? Oh please.

    Comparing tagging to driveby shooting is stupid, reckless, and cruel.

    Learn some tact and grow some brains, Rdizzy.

  5. I think calling tagging a gateway activity to greater crime is a lot more reasonable an argument than calling pot a gateway to heroine abuse.

    Tagging on public or others’ private property teaches a disrespect for society. It allows contempt for the value of property and for the people who own or care for it. Are all taggers going to join a gang and shoot someone? No, of course not. But all the cutesy sprayed ironic bullshit sidewalk art in the world will not undue the history of graffiti as a way of marking territory and disrespecting others’ marks of the same area – and as an integral part of gang culture.

    Teaching your children that obeying laws is optional sends kind of the wrong message for the later, bigger stuff, no? I’m no fan of the slippery slope argument in 99% of examples where it is used. This one, however, might fit.

  6. I think calling tagging a gateway activity to greater crime is a lot more reasonable an argument than calling pot a gateway to heroine abuse.

    That’s because you insist on a worldview where graffiti is inseperable from gangs and crime, which, no offense, demonstrates a pretty limited knowledge of both the history of graffiti and the culture of graffiti as it exists today.

    I agree, however, that enabling your children’s law breaking is a mistake that should probably be punished.

  7. First the Social Services lady gets mad I don’t take my kids anywhere, then everyone makes fun of me for helping them with their so-called “art”, I can’t win with all you levas. You all just dont understand the cholo lifestyle…

  8. Let’s remember that some laws are wrong.

    I’m not saying that this one was. I’m saying that just because it’s a law, doesn’t necessarily mean you should obey it. If you had to choose to stay at home and smoke a bowl or go outside and tag concrete overpasses, which would you do? Or would you smoke a bowl and then go out tagging. ha ha ha.

  9. “I’m not saying that this one was. I’m saying that just because it’s a law, doesn’t necessarily mean you should obey it.”

    Maybe that’s what the guy who climbed over your fence and stole your yard ornaments was thinking. I bet if Krylon mom & sonnyboy spraypaint were tagging your garage door, you would have a whole different perspective on the issue.

    How is helping a minor to commit a crime anything other than a really bad, irresponsible thing to do? Fucking inexcusable, regardless of where you fall on the graffiti/art issue.

  10. She got off easy. She should have at least been forced to wear a shirt with the letters G.D.M. (Getaway Driver Mom) spray painted on the front.

    Perhaps though, “in the interest of justice,” having her drive a clean up crew around town would have been very apt.

  11. How is helping a minor to commit a crime anything other than a really bad, irresponsible thing to do? Fucking inexcusable, regardless of where you fall on the graffiti/art issue.

    So I’m guessing that you never let anyone in Tulsa buy you beer before you turned 21? Or if they did, you fully support them being punished for it? ;)

  12. This is my favorite comment threat in a long, long time.

    Heather, there are bigger fish to fry, but the mom’s actions were so flagrant they deserve more than a slap on the wrist.

    What’s concerning is that she is encouraging her own child to commit a crime. She raised him, she’s still his guardian, and yet he’s the one who needs to take more responsibility for his actions?
    If anything, I think the kid should have gotten off with a slap on the wrist, and the mom should get the harsh punishment.

  13. What a bunch of cry babies, even my babies don’t complain as much as all of you do, and one of them is going to be doing some time in county, 46 days to be exact! I still have to do 90 days in the pinta cuz the legal system is whack, for some previous drug shit, no matter how long youre in, you never serve your time. You little bitches should be thankful the cops don’t go after white druggies the way they do for darkies, your mistakes are just a fuckin youthful indiscrection. Or else your pops knows who to know to get it all squared up. No matter, I’ll be thinking about how all the “art” shit you love to promote and embrace always comes from the same criminal element you find so easy to castigate and dismiss, as long as it’s been a gallery or curator removed from its place of origin. It’s worse now that so many of you putos want to exhibit your pastel and eat it too. You all be chueco sad.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-graffiti21oct21,1,1556848.story

  14. 5000! – your comment was kind of what I was expecting – and hoping – someone would say. You’re right, I am resorting to the gang culture connotations of graffiti.

    And why shouldn’t I.

    I don’t believe it’s an “art form” that can be reclaimed. Unless those practicing the art form are only going to their own back walls or houses, or those of their consenting friends, or using traditional elements and fonts to paint on canvas it’s a crime. Period. You are not supposed to write on other people’s stuff. Not the sidewalks, which belong to everyone, nor the freeway overpasses, nor the backs of buildings, nor walls, nothing. If they don’t belong to you, leave them the F alone.

    I don’t take offense to your comment because you’re wrong – my view isn’t as limited as you think- and because I don’t think this dude and his mom were out there on the cutting edge of urban artistry.

  15. They both are unauthorized defacement of public property, yes, you’re right. You happen to enjoy the aesthetic of one and are more able to apply to it a meaning and cultural relevance that you can accept than you can apply to gang-related or just nonsense tags.

    Just ’cause the picture is cuter, however, doesn’t make it alright. Maybe we should put all of them into a warehouse together to hone their craft on canvas rather than on other people’s property.

    Vandals are vandals.

  16. Will: Crap, you’re right. Kills my argument.
    In which case, she’s still a crap mom, but she’s merely an accomplice and should be treated no differently then any other get away driver.

  17. If we’re supporting alternative cultures, why the assumptions that all gang bangers are violent? Why aren’t you supporting their expression and street art.

    At least Will does admit that it is hypocritical to condone one form of vandalism and not another.

  18. I’ve lived in LA for just shy of 2 years, and I have got to say that the Los Angeles Mother has got to be the most obnoxious breed of human out there. They use their kids as weapons against the rest of the world, their perfect little genius angels who can do no wrong.

    They let the little monsters run around restaurants screaming at the top of their lungs, they run people over with their strollers in crowded areas, they demand that everyone around pay attention to their little darlings.

    I have got to say that I am totally not surprised that this mom thought it was perfectly acceptable to drive the kids around vandalizing other people’s property.

    I think SOME grafitti is art, but it should be in an appropriate venue and I think that the city should provide a venue, but writing your name on someone’s wall is not right and mom should be driving the kids around to help clean up.

  19. “If we’re supporting alternative cultures, why the assumptions that all gang bangers are violent? Why aren’t you supporting their expression and street art.”

    Well, for several reasons which should be obvious – gangs exists because of violence. Every gang out there can trace it’s roots to a group of violent people. That has never been questioned.

    Additionally, no one is aruging that gang tags are art, not even the gang bangers. You are assuming that because the medium is the same the motivation also matches, which isn’t the case at all. Gang tags are looked at like street signs, a notification to people in the area about who is in charge. There is no artistic intent involved at any level. To say that painting 4 letters on a garage door to threaten people in the neiborhood is the same as a grafitti artist spending several hours on a piece on an abandonded building is insane.

    the tool doesn’t dictate the motive.

  20. “At least Will does admit that it is hypocritical to condone one form of vandalism and not another.”

    You can argue semantics CD, but I do not admit to it being a hypocritical position, nor to being hypocrite. I merely recognize that some people such as yourself will consider it and me to be.

  21. Okay, you’re right, I didn’t remember your previous comment correctly, so I withdraw my previous comment.

    Disallowing the legitimacy of gang-related taggging while valuing that of so-called artists is viewpoint discrimination at its finest. Screw the First Amendment.

    If you like one, you should like them all. I dislike one (and the violence and related nastiness that goes with it – along with its illegality) and therefore am unwilling to make an exception for something that looks prettier to the masses. That mom should’ve been penalized appropriately, not let off the hoook.

  22. There is no artistic intent involved at any level.

    that is not really true, there is tons of graf which is both gang-related and beautiful. And there are taggers who are all-city and yet not affiliated with any gang. It’s all mixed up which is kind of the point.

  23. I posted this yesterday, but it doesn’t seem to have made it through. Here it is again…

    You’re right, I am resorting to the gang culture connotations of graffiti.

    And why shouldn’t I.

    How about because stereotypes are bad?

    Note that I haven’t espoused any judgements about the rightness or wrongness of tagging, which is what you seem to be responding to. Instead, I challenge your assertion that it’s inseperable from gangs and criminality. More specifically, that tagging as a gateway activity to greater crime is a more reasonable argument that marijuana as a gateway drug to harder drugs because of it’s associations with gangs.

    As with any subculture, graffiti has rich and varied history and an equally rich and varied present day community. Making an assumption that all graffiti, or even all tagging, is gang related because of historical connections to gangs is as blindly ill-informed as saying that all blackletter typography is gang-related because of it’s prevalence in gang tattoos and images.

    You’re right that it can’t be “reclaimed,” because there’s nothing to reclaim. Gang graffiti is one aspect of larger and more varied culture, just like gangsta rap is one part of a larger and more varied musical form known as hip-hop. But that doesn’t make all taggers gang-bangers just like it doesn’t make all rappers hoodlums.

  24. If I had been busted for underage drinking as a kid, it would have been a fair cop, as the Brits say. I understood that as a kid and I’ve got no problem with that now.

    Shepard Fairey does great street art, but he knows that he could be busted for it, and accepts that as part of the gig. If I were driving him around with his posters and wheat paste, I couldn’t really say that I didn’t know that our activity was against the law.

    If you want to argue it’s a stupid law (I don’t agree, BTW) that’s another argument entirely different from this one.

    If you choose to do something that is illegal, and you get busted for it, don’t fucking whine to me that it is somehow unfair that you are punished for it. Those kids and their mom knew they were doing something illegal, and they should accept the consequences of their acts.

    All these other arguments and value judgements about graffitti, gang activity and art just cloud the issue.

    What if mom were driving the kids around to smash mailboxes with baseball bats? That’s vandalism, too. If I smash a mailbox in my next gallery show, does that then make all mailbox-smashing art by extension?

  25. I’m this woman’s neighbor and cannot tell you how ridiculous the L.A. Times picture of her as a “devoted” mother is. I live within screaming distance of her and her family and can tell you that I’ve had to tolerate near daily arguments, gang-banger parties, drive-by shootings, and a myriad other problems just by living there. This woman is a HORRIBLE influence on her kids and they respond accordingly. Check out the other people that live there too. Freddy Villicano is a convicted sex offender (Megan’s law website), the people they mention in the L.A. Times article are family (Ray Bermudez) also share her same lack of common sense. I have to keep it cool just so they don’t F with me or my family, and I have to confess that we were all relieved when they were gone.

    I’ll give you an example (of the many I’ve personally witnessed); someone beat up David’s younger brother (the 15 year old mentioned in the article), and that someone’s older brother came to make peace with David. They agreed that each would handle their younger brother to ensure the issue would not escalate. Just when all was settled, Victoria rushed out screaming that David was being “punked and made an f-ing fool” and that they should just go f-up the other kid. THIS is the “devoted” mother. I have many, MANY stories, all of which end up with mother and kids getting into screaming matches in the middle of the street followed up by Ray’s and his brother’s escalating the issue to the point that it’s a family affair for all of us to enjoy. Heck, want to verify for yourself? Call LAPD’s Northeast division and ask them for crime statistics for Avalon Street (90026). I’ve seen SWAT raid that house, all streets be blocked for investigation of those houses, you name it. I bet the color on their roof is has some discoloration from the amount of helicopter spotlight shone on it through the years!

    Why don’t we move? Well, responding to that would give up exactly who I am and I’m not ready to face their discontent with me. Suffice it to say that we have sufficient reasons to hold on to our properties.

    While they were gone the street was quiet and it was what I hoped the neighborhood would be like. Now they’re back and it’s back to the same scream matches, constant fights, stereo’s blasting from cars parked in front of her house, etc. It sucks and little can be done unless we’re ready to face the repercussions.

  26. CD:
    Disallowing the legitimacy of gang-related taggging while valuing that of so-called artists is viewpoint discrimination at its finest. Screw the First Amendment.

    If you like one, you should like them all.

    That is the most ludicrous excuse for an argument I’ve seen in a while. A political poster and a “don’t park in my driveway” sign hung on a garage door are both protected by the First Amendment. Because I “like” the poster (i.e., I consider it art), I must also “like” the garage sign in the same way? All they have in common is that they are legible and that they are protected by law from prior restraint. It is perfectly sensible for a person to “like” (defend; praise; support the proliferation of) the poster and dislike the garage sign, while acknowledging that there is nothing illicit about the signal content of either.

    It defies logic to demand that a person who likes one must like the other, or that a person who dislikes one must dislike the other. Just because you can’t tell the difference, it’s no reason to expect others to share your inability to discern.

  27. CD:
    Disallowing the legitimacy of gang-related taggging while valuing that of so-called artists is viewpoint discrimination at its finest. Screw the First Amendment.

    If you like one, you should like them all.

    That is the most ludicrous excuse for an argument I’ve seen in a while. A political poster and a “don’t park in my driveway” sign hung on a garage door are both protected by the First Amendment. Because I “like” the poster (i.e., I consider it art), I must also “like” the garage sign in the same way? All they have in common is that they are legible and that they are protected by law from prior restraint. It is perfectly sensible for a person to “like” (defend; praise; support the proliferation of) the poster and dislike the garage sign, while acknowledging that there is nothing illicit about the signal content of either.

    It defies logic to demand that a person who likes one must like the other, or that a person who dislikes one must dislike the other. Just because you can’t tell the difference, it’s no reason to expect others to share your inability to discern.

  28. You’re right. You don’t have to like it. But you should stand up and defend the bangers right to spray their bullshit, violence-inciting crap on walls if you’re going to defend the rights of artists to spray their pretty pictures in the same manner.

    Personally, I think everyone who taggs is wrong. Period. There were comments above implying that several artists acknowledge that they are in fact taking the risk of getting nabbed for breaking the law. I’m so proud of their honesty.

    But it’s still illegal. No matter who you are, or what you paint.

  29. Hello, Topic Police, we’ve got a jumper!

    CD – no one in this thread has ever said that graffiti artists have a right to vandalize anything, and certainly not anything that other people don’t. We’ve all agreed 100% that vandalism is vandalism no matter what color it’s painted in. The argument is that any/all of it is gang related or that it’s put up with the same intention.

  30. Sean Bonner wrote:

    “Well, for several reasons which should be obvious – gangs exists because of violence. Every gang out there can trace it’s roots to a group of violent people. That has never been questioned.”

    That’s not true, most gangs in Los Angeles started off as social clubs, car clubs, dancing crews etc. My grandparents grew up in LA (I’m third generation Angelina) and they’ve told me stories about the origins of many of the older gangs,many were just social clubs. Other social factors like the drug trade and easier access to firearms have turned them violent.

    It’s funny taggers are getting so much shit while at the same time graf artists like Banksy make millions and is the toast of the town. What’s the dif? Vans is doing ads now with Cholo style graf and iconography. Artists like Mr. Cartoon and Esteban Oriol are getting rich of off the cholo lifestyle.

    You all can complain all you want, when people have no voices, they’ll find a way to get heard.

Comments are closed.