New Indy youth curfew would include fine for parents. Here's how much
An Indianapolis City-County Council committee voted unanimously July 16 to make the youth curfew two hours earlier, meaning children ages 15-17 won't be allowed in public unsupervised past 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and past 9 p.m. Sundays through Thursdays. Children under 15 will face a 9 p.m. curfew every day.
But the stricter curfew won't take effect until after a full council vote Aug. 11 and will remain in place for only 120 days, at which point the council will decide whether to extend or relax the policy.
Until then, including during this weekend's busy WNBA All-Star festivities, Indianapolis police will enforce the state law that sets youth curfews two hours later. This weekend, police will debut a downtown site where officers will take kids who violate curfew and connect them with their parents or guardians.
The change comes after hundreds of unsupervised teens lingered downtown in the hours following the Fourth of July fireworks show, culminating in a mass shooting after midnight that killed Xavion Jackson, 16, and Azareaon S. Cole, 15. Two other teens and three adults were also injured.
The curfew ordinance doesn't create a criminal offense for children, but it does grant police the authority to detain them. The policy allows several exceptions for kids who are returning home from work, a school activity or a religious event, among others.
The only possible penalty is fining the parents or guardians of repeat violators up to $2,500 for a first offense and up to $7,500 for a second offense, according to council attorney Brandon Beeler.
The council doesn't have the authority to require mandatory parenting classes as previously discussed, said Leroy Robinson, chair of the Public Safety Committee, which passed the new proposal.
Multiple councilors, particularly council Republicans, said they support harsh penalties for parents or guardians who neglect to look after their children.
"We don't want to make this punitive for the children particularly, we want to help them," Democratic Councilor Dan Boots said. "But we've tried various things for decades, and we're still having a big problem.
"Historically, we've whipped people with wet noodles," Boots added. "Our enforcement's been pretty weak. People don't feel the pain, so therefore they don't fix the problem."
While councilors tout the curfew as an important tool to keep children safe, critics say it will be ignored and even mocked by teens who are already willing to break the law by carrying guns.
Kids as young as 13 and 14 were charged with gun possession over the Fourth of July weekend, and a total of eight teens and three adults face charges in connection with the downtown mayhem, according to the Marion County Prosecutor's Office.
Fraternal Order of Police President Rick Snyder, who represents all IMPD officers, told councilors they need to demand harsher penalties from the prosecutor and the court system.
"We're talking about criminally violent offenders armed with guns who ... are laughing at what we're doing here tonight," Snyder said.
"They know nothing will happen to them in the juvenile justice system," Snyder added. "That's a huge red flag."
The Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department hasn't enforced the state curfew for years because the juvenile court system was unwilling to process violations, IMPD Chief Chris Bailey said. That changed last year after a different downtown Indianapolis mass shooting wounded seven teens, and IMPD officers announced plans to enforce the curfew.
"Voluntary compliance is what we all want," Bailey said while speaking in support of the bill Wednesday night. "Keep your kids home so they stay alive, so they don't end up in our custody for some criminal charge, or they don't catch a stray round."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
18 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
In Epstein furor, Trump struggles to shake off a controversy his allies once stoked
It was another example of how the Epstein saga — and his administration's disjointed approach to it — has shadowed Trump when he's otherwise at the height of his influence. He's enacted a vast legislative agenda, reached trade deals with key countries and tightened his grip across the federal government. Yet he's struggled to stamp out the embers of a political crisis that could become a full-on conflagration. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump faces pressure from his own supporters Advertisement The Republican president's supporters want the government to release secret files about Epstein, who authorities say killed himself in his New York jail cell six years ago while awaiting trial for sex trafficking. They believe him to be the nexus of a dark web of powerful people who abused underage girls. Administration officials who once stoked conspiracy theories now insist there's nothing more to disclose, a stance that has stirred skepticism because of Trump's former friendship with Epstein. Advertisement Trump has repeatedly denied prior knowledge of Epstein's crimes and claimed he cut off their relationship long ago. For a president skilled at manipulating the media and controlling the Republican Party, it has been the most challenging test of his ability to shift the conversation in his second term. 'This is a treadmill to nowhere. How do you get off of it?' said Kevin Madden, a Republican strategist. 'I genuinely don't know the answer to that.' Trump has demanded his supporters drop the matter and urged Republicans to block Democratic requests for documents on Capitol Hill. But he has also directed the Justice Department to divulge some additional information in hopes of satisfying his supporters. A White House official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal strategy, said Trump is trying to stay focused on his agenda while also demonstrating some transparency. After facing countless scandals and investigations, the official said, Trump is on guard against the typical playbook of drip-drip disclosures that have plagued him in the past. It's clear Trump sees the Epstein case as a continuation of the 'witch hunts' he's faced over the years, starting with the investigation into Russian interference during his election victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton nearly a decade ago. The sprawling inquiry led to convictions against some top advisers but did not substantiate allegations Trump conspired with Moscow. Trump's opponents, he wrote on social media on Thursday, 'have gone absolutely CRAZY, and are playing another Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax but, this time, under the guise of what we will call the Jeffrey Epstein SCAM.' During the Russia investigation, special counsel Robert Mueller and his team of prosecutors were a straightforward foil for Trump to rail against. Ty Cobb, the lawyer who served as the White House's point person, said the president 'never felt exposed' because 'he thought he had a legitimate gripe.' Advertisement The situation is different this time now that the Justice Department has been stocked with loyalists. 'The people that he has to get mad at are basically his people as opposed to his inquisitors and adversaries,' Cobb said. It was Trump's allies who excavated the Epstein debacle In fact, Trump's own officials are the most responsible for bringing the Epstein case back to the forefront. FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, regularly stoked conspiracy theories about Epstein before assuming their current jobs, floating the idea the government had covered up incriminating and compelling information that needed to be brought to light. 'Put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are,' Patel said in a 2023 podcast. Attorney General Pam Bondi played a key role, too. She intimated in a Fox News Channel interview in February that an Epstein 'client list' was sitting on her desk for review — she would later say she was referring to the Epstein files more generally — and greeted far-right influencers with binders of records from the case that consisted largely of information already in the public domain. Tensions spiked earlier this month when the FBI and the Justice Department, in an unsigned two-page letter, said that no client list existed, that the evidence was clear Epstein had killed himself and that no additional records from the case would be released to the public. It was a seeming backtrack on the administration's stated commitment to transparency. Amid a fierce backlash from Trump's base and influential conservative personalities, Bongino and Bondi squabbled openly in a tense White House meeting. Advertisement Since then, the Trump administration has scrambled to appear transparent, including by seeking the unsealing of grand jury transcripts in the case — though it's hardly clear that courts would grant that request or that those records include any eye-catching details anyway. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has taken the unusual step of interviewing the imprisoned Maxwell over the course of two days at a courthouse in Tallahassee, Florida, where her lawyer said she would 'always testify truthfully.' All the while, Trump and his allies have resurfaced the Russia investigation as a rallying cry for a political base that has otherwise been frustrated by the Epstein saga. Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who just weeks ago appeared on the outs with Trump over comments on Iran's nuclear ambitions, seemed to return to the president's good graces this week following the declassification and release of years-old documents she hoped would discredit long-settled conclusions about Russian interference in the 2016 election. The developments allowed Trump to rehash longstanding grievances against President Barack Obama and his Democratic advisers. Trump's talk of investigations into perceived adversaries from years ago let him, in effect, go back in time to deflect attention from a very current crisis. 'Whether it's right or wrong,' Trump said, 'it's time to go after people.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's End Game With The Wall Street Journal Defamation Lawsuit
At the top of a long list of questions surrounding President Trump's defamation lawsuit against the publisher of The Wall Street Journal: Does he expect to win the legal battle, or did he initiate it solely as a political stunt? And what does winning exactly mean to him? The circumstances around the filing of the lawsuit, which alleges that Trump was defamed in a report detailing a 2003 birthday letter from him to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, provide some clues. To start, it was brought in federal court in Florida rather than New York, where News Corp. is based, or Washington, D.C., where Trump resides. More from The Hollywood Reporter Trump's Side Deal With "New Owners" of Paramount May Hint at FCC Concessions Critic's Notebook: Ozzy Osbourne Created the Template for Reality TV Celebrity Reinvention, From Flavor Flav to Donald Trump House Republicans Vote to Rename Kennedy Center Opera House After Melania Trump If he does intend to take the case to a jury and is allowed to proceed in the Southern District of Florida because the Journal is distributed in the state, it's a smart play. Alejandro Brito, Trump's lawyer who also handled his defamation battle against ABC News, filed the lawsuit in the Miami division of the district, where jurors may be more likely to side-eye reporting from the Journal than those in liberal enclaves like Manhattan or D.C. For the enterprising defamation plaintiff, it pays to be in certain states with deep red outposts. Consider a Bay County, Florida, jury this year awarding a U.S. Navy veteran $5 million over a 2021 CNN report portraying him as illegally exploiting Afghans by charging exorbitant fees to be evacuated in the aftermath of the U.S. military withdrawal from the country. He later brought defamation lawsuits against the Associated Press and Puck News in the same state court. But there's another explanation for the more conspiratorial thinker: maybe Trump wants the lawsuit to get dismissed, or at least doesn't plan to take it all the way to the finish line before a jury. The Journal article was published July 17. Trump sued a day later, but a Florida statute requires at least five days written notice to a publication accused of defamation. The purpose of the provision is to provide newspapers every opportunity to make a full and fair retraction. The court could grant early dismissal of the lawsuit, if News Corp. moves to do so, under this law, which also provides for payment of legal fees. In a defamation case against The Daily Beast brought by right-wing commentator Dan Bongino over reporting about the end of his NRA TV show, the court noted that insufficient notice could necessitate dismissal 'with prejudice,' meaning it can't be refiled. Also at play: the lawsuit doesn't present an especially strong case that Trump was defamed by the Journal's reporting. 'The president's suit attempts to extrapolate from the carefully written story published by the WSJ, which never asserted that Trump had written or drawn or signed the content, but rather that the card in the birthday wishes book bears what appears to be a signature of his and what is a sketch of a naked woman's body,' says Christopher Beall, a First Amendment lawyer at Recht Kornfeld LLP and former Colorado Deputy Secretary of State. 'This is a classic plaintiff's maneuver of trying to assert that the defendant said something that they did not.' Assuming Brito, Trump's lawyer, was under orders to immediately sue, that would lend credibility to the belief that the lawsuit's actual goal is political or in the realm of public relations. By Trump's thinking, does it matter if he loses the case as long as he makes a fuss that the Journal's reporting was false? In this case, the last thing Trump wants is to drag out discovery, which would mean his name continuing to be splashed across headlines alongside Epstein's. Questioning under oath likely isn't in the cards. Six months after suing his former fixer Michael Cohen, Trump dropped the 2023 lawsuit, which was overseen by the same judge appointed to his case against the Journal, ahead of a key deposition. Another not mutually exclusive explanation lies in the possibility of Trump planning to extract concessions from News Corp. and the Journal by way of a settlement, regardless of the merits of the case. There's a well-worn road map. ABC News settled a lawsuit from Trump over its reporting for $15 million, as did CBS for $16 million despite the widespread belief that the case was frivolous. The inconvenient truth: Trump has various paths to a victory outside of a jury trial ending with a verdict that he was defamed. The X-factor in the legal showdown between Trump and the Journal will be Rupert Murdoch. The media scion has ambitions beyond News Corp. Making an adversary out of Trump could complicate his plans to bequeath his empire to his favored son, Lachlan Murdoch, who's more on the same page as him as far as keeping Fox a conservative media juggernaut than his other children. There's also speculation about what would happen with a Fox sale, which could be thwarted by various regulatory agencies taking orders from Trump as seen in the FCC asserting authority over Paramount's proposed merger with Skydance. Everyone will talk about the uphill battle that Trump faces proving 'actual malice,' requiring proof that the publication knew the article was false or acted with reckless disregard for its truth. But the reality is that Trump likely doesn't think the lawsuit will get to that stage of litigation. Best of The Hollywood Reporter How the Warner Brothers Got Their Film Business Started Meet the World Builders: Hollywood's Top Physical Production Executives of 2023 Men in Blazers, Hollywood's Favorite Soccer Podcast, Aims for a Global Empire Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Disgraced former Rep. George Santos reports to prison for seven-year sentence
WASHINGTON — Disgraced former Rep. George Santos reported to prison on Friday, beginning a more than seven-year sentence after pleading guilty to a laundry list of federal charges that included wire fraud, identity theft and money laundering. He is in custody at the Federal Correctional Institution Fairton in Fairton, New Jersey, the Federal Bureau of Prisons confirmed Friday. The flashy New York Republican, who stormed onto the national stage when he unexpectedly won a congressional seat in 2022 and was expelled by his colleagues the very next year, didn't go quietly this week. He appeared on an hour-long podcast, engaged with his followers on X Spaces and posted a series of farewell tweets on X. He also continued to post videos for supporters on the Cameo platform through Friday morning, charging a minimum of $300 per video, according to the site. 'Well, darlings …The curtain falls, the spotlight dims, and the rhinestones are packed. From the halls of Congress to the chaos of cable news what a ride it's been! Was it messy? Always. Glamorous? Occasionally. Honest? I tried… most days,' Santos wrote on X. 'I may be leaving the stage (for now), but trust me legends never truly exit," he continued. In his hour-and-a-half Spaces live broadcast, Santos, a Donald Trump ally in Congress, said he had been asked by many people whether he would get a presidential pardon or commutation that could cut short his 87-month sentence. 'The answer to that is, I don't know. You're asking the wrong person,' he said on Thursday. 'The only person that can answer that question is, you know, whoever the president of the United States is — in this case, President Donald Trump.' The White House has not commented on the matter. Santos' political career was one of the shortest and most tumultuous in recent memory. Even before he was sworn into office, the New York Times and other outlets revealed that he had fabricated parts of his resume, and the personal narrative that he shared with donors and voters on the campaign trail began to fall apart. The House Ethics Committee issued a scathing investigative report about Santos, finding he'd likely committed multiple federal crimes, and the Justice Department indicted him on 23 counts, including embezzling contributions from supporters, illegally obtaining unemployment benefits and lying on House financial disclosures. In the 2022 midterm elections, Santos had been one of four Republicans who had flipped Democratic-held seats in New York. But after the indictment and Ethics report, it was those same New York GOP colleagues who led the charge to oust him from Congress. On Dec. 1, 2023, the House voted 311-114 to expel Santos, making him just the sixth person in U.S. history to be expelled from the House of Representatives. After his guilty plea, Santos was sentenced to 87 months behind bars this past April and ordered to pay almost $374,000 in restitution and over $200,000 in forfeiture. During his appearances this week, Santos repeatedly expressed remorse for his lies and actions, even as he tried to settle political scores with those who ousted him from Congress. "I think we can all attest that I've made a string of s--- choices in my life, and for that, I'm sorry to those I've disappointed, to those I've let down, to those that I have caused irreparable damage. I'm sorry. I mean it. I'm not— I'm not placating. This isn't for show," Santos said on Spaces. "It's just, life sucks sometimes and life-ing is hard," he said. This article was originally published on