Little shop of boozers: Police say minors liquored up at Mass. Ave. ice-cream parlor
By adamg - 3/1/09 - 2:27 pm
Boston Police report busting up a soiree at Wheeler's Cafe and Ice Cream Bar on Mass. Ave. around 12:50 this morning after officers discovered members of the under-21 set consuming "beer and shots of alcohol:"
Officers observed the windows of the store to be "blacked out" for they were covered with sheets of black nylon, giving the illusion that the store was closed. Officers entered the store and discovered 60 to 70 individuals congregating within, consuming alcohol and listening to music emanating from a large DJ system.
Upon further investigation, it was learned that a large number of the individuals were under the legal drinking age of Twenty-One. Partygoers informed officers that they received a wristband for admittance after paying a Ten-Dollar cover charge. Once inside, they were served beer & shots of alcohol. They further stated that they learned of the establishment through the Wheeler's Ice Cream Parlor's Facebook page.
Hmm, for some reason, the ad for the event is gone from the joint's Facebook page today, although you can still see photos from past dances at the shop there and here. The "micro-creamery" sells only vegan ice cream, including a line of alcohol-flavored treats.
Police say Eric Marcelino, 27, of Acushnet, and Rodeye Mckiedhem, 41, of Cambridge, were arrested and charged with disturbing the peace, procuring alcohol for minors and selling/furnishing alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21.
Innocent, etc.
Comments
FREE EMARCE!!!!!!!
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 4:23 pm
FREE EMARCE!!!!!!!
Emarce?
By adamg - 3/1/09 - 4:32 pm
Oh, yeah, Emarce.
Not a good omen, imho.
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 5:14 pm
It's amazing how people can and will circumvent the law(s) for their own ends. it would serve those guys right if they ended up getting into trouble, such as getting their liquor license lifted, for instance. No sympathy for those who violate the law.
Or maybe the drinking age should just be lowered to 18 again
By Ron Newman - 3/1/09 - 6:20 pm
as it was when I was that age. That would make this entire event a non-issue and of no interest to the police.
Lowering the drinking age to 18? I disagree, Ron.
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 6:27 pm
First of all, when the drinking age was lowered to 18 at one point, there was even more drinking among high school kids.
Secondly, as has been pointed out on more than one occasion by another poster, a teenage brain's front cortex is not sufficiently matured and developed physically, and the use of alcohol has been known to impede development of underaged drinkers when they drink enough.
Statistics
By SwirlyGrrl - 3/1/09 - 10:02 pm
Statistics, please.
Itw ould still be of interest to the police.
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 6:40 pm
I doubt an ice cream shop is licensed to host an event like this.
as someone who knows eric
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 5:44 pm
as someone who knows eric and goes to a lot of the parties he throws, i can attest to the fact that they DO in fact card at the door. for those under the age of 21, you get two very large, very black X's on your hand in permanent marker. every party i have been to has had "staff" walking around checking hands/drinks and monitoring the bathrooms to ensure there is no underage drinking, and i have seen kids kicked out many times for doing so. that being said, i also see the other side of things where people text their friends and let them know what color wristbands are being used - they pick them up at a party supply store or wherever - and bring them along, scrub off the x's and get served. OR i have seen underage kids sneak in "nips" in different ways. that is something that can't really be prevented. it's not like eric would knowingly serve these underage kids. he is far too responsible to even engage in such an act.
this is absolutely rediculous. the kids that were drinking underage should have been the ones to get arrested. isn't that what happens when you throw a house party? same thing, basically.
If eric kicks out kids who're underage, then good for him.
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 6:15 pm
He's doing the right thing. Maybe the best thing to do, if there are going to be underaged kids at a given party is to not have any alcohol, whether it be at a house party, or in a public place.
This is different than a house party
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 6:42 pm
He was charging admission, which means he was required to have the proper entertainment and liquor licenses in place.
Fair enough, anon, but here's another point:
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 7:59 pm
Often enough, a place with a liquor license who does serve to underage drinkers runs the risk of having their liquor license(s) lifted, and a heavy fine levied on them.
Nice try, anon
By Kaz - 3/1/09 - 8:18 pm
As someone who goes to a lot of the parties he throws...you can also lie through your teeth to try and save your favorite underage booze parties from getting slapped down.
Those X's (not scrubbed off) really kept these people from getting booze:
I also didn't notice a single person with an X who looked sober in the pictures I went through. I also didn't see any "bracelets" on those who didn't have X's. Nice try, anon apologist, but basically they mark at the door, shade the windows, and serve to whoever pays.
Too bad for Emarce, but they brought it on themselves.
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 6:39 pm
They did not have the proper licenses in place to do an event like this, sorry, but thats a fact. If he wants to compete with nightclubs and serve alcohol (and have the events be 18+ no less), set up sound systems and have dancing, then he can jump through all the hoops and carry the all costs associated with running a licensed establishment. He doesn't want to do that, he just wants to do what he wants to do. Well, you can get away with that for a while, but sooner or later you are going to get busted. And how stupid is it to not only do this event, but do it right under a residential complex for senior citizens. duh.
are you guys deleting
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 6:54 pm
are you guys deleting comments now?
I haven't in this thread
By adamg - 3/1/09 - 7:59 pm
But here's the deal:
If you want your comment to go up right away, get an account. They're free and nothing gets done with the info you provide - except to set up your account and send you your password if you forget it.
If you want to stay anonymous, don't log in, but be aware that all anonymous comments go into a queue where I approve them when I get around to them (so yes, there can be a delay) - and, yes, I will delete an anonymous ad-hominem attack. If you want to attack somebody, you're going to have to show at least a little accountability, by signing up for an account (I'm not saying that's happened in this thread; it's more a general issue, along with spammers).
He makes money off underaged
By anon (not verified) - 3/1/09 - 8:33 pm
He makes money off underaged kids getting drunk at an illegal party to pay his rent, and gets arrested? If my child were there I would have sued, he needs to be held responsible for this, both the DJ who organized the event and the owner.
Why not go to Montreal instead?
By SwirlyGrrl - 3/1/09 - 10:00 pm
There are buses to get you there and back that are coupled with cheap hotel packages, and a legal drinking age of 18.
too bad the drinking age in
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 2:27 pm
too bad the drinking age in canada is at 21 now for americans.
And you drank the koolaid for that reason?
By SwirlyGrrl - 3/2/09 - 9:54 pm
Sorry you got duped and then started hallucinating things ... but the drinking age in Canada varies by province and is not nationality dependent.
Getting your facts straight is useful before posting.
We need more businesses like
By J - 3/1/09 - 11:22 pm
We need more businesses like this in downtown crossing.
Who is this party hurting?
Yeah, nobody lives at Mass Ave and St. Botolph!
By Kaz - 3/2/09 - 12:31 am
I'd imagine that the quality of life isn't improved by fights obnoxious enough to require the police to show up, the noise of DJ'd techno parties until 2 AM, and 50-150 drunk underaged jerks roaming the streets yelling up and down the street while walking home trashed or trying to get a cab to stop.
But, hey, who's this party hurting?
Apparently these parties
By J - 3/2/09 - 1:27 am
Apparently these parties have been going on for awhile, and this is the first time cops were called. And looking at the map, very few people live in the immediate surroundings. Its a commercial/college area.
I rather kids be dancing to music for a few hours than the alternative. Considering meninos 21+ rule, the alternative is much worse than a beer.
Fact checking
By Kaz - 3/2/09 - 4:03 am
The shop has only been open since last May, so about 10 months. The party posters only advertise back to around December, so it doesn't seem like the parties have been happening for longer than about 2 months in any organized sort of way (but then again, they don't call them "underground" to begin with because they're well known, so who knows when the first one really was). And since New Year's Eve, they seem to have advertised only about 4-5 of them over those 2 months.
As for "looking at the map"...try looking at the address: 334 Mass Ave has 188 apartments in the exact same building as this part-time "nightclub" which I'm sure the owner thought was going to be an ice cream store when it leased the space. It's on the north side of the road making it closer to the brownstones of the South End than the closest university buildings of Northeastern. Why do you think there's a 2 PM mandated closing time for bars? It's because of noise considerations in the city which is so mixed zone, putting the bars in residential areas...nevermind an ice cream store that's supposedly closing at 9 PM most days.
There's basically nothing good going on here. They were *blacking out the windows* because they didn't want to attract attention outside the place, because they *knew* what they were doing inside was in violation.
"Move it to Downtown Crossing" is actually a good suggestion
By Ron Newman - 3/2/09 - 10:15 am
Since almost nobody lives there except Emerson and Suffolk students, it makes sense to liven up the district by allowing things there that shouldn't be in more residential neighborhoods (such as 4 am liquor licenses).
Really?
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 11:02 am
What do we need more bars in the downtown area for? There are enough bars in this town as it is.
How would you know?
By SwirlyGrrl - 3/2/09 - 9:36 pm
You never leave your house, from the sound of it ... work at home, fear the dark and the scary people who selectively attack all women between the hours of 8pm and dawn, etc.
Bullshit, SwirlyGrrl!
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/3/09 - 12:16 pm
What the fuck do you know about me? Nothing...not a goddamned thing. Your assholish response to my opinions is duly noted. I get around more than you think, honeybabe. I do have a life outside my house, so go fuck yourself, and don't bother replying to this post. Thanks.
Take it outside, willya?
By adamg - 3/3/09 - 12:20 pm
First, you can't tell somebody not to reply to a post (well, you can, but it's not going to work).
Second, maybe I'm just a prude, but there are ways to reply to insults without swearing like a sailor.
Third, since both of you are registered users, you can click on her name and send her your own flaming e-mail rather than unloading a series of f-bombs.
Hold on a minute, Adam!
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/3/09 - 4:43 pm
As you can see, I'm not a nice person when I'm attacked, and whoever does can expect retaliation. Why not also tell Swirlybaby to lay off the personal attacks on me so she won't end up getting cussed out?
I'm gonna make popcorn!
By Michael - 3/3/09 - 4:51 pm
Who's in?
if ya want ...
By anon (not verified) - 3/3/09 - 12:43 pm
somebody could link to all the posts where you said this stuff
I may be late in responding to this post, sweety, but ya know
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/17/09 - 2:12 pm
I'm late in responding to this post, sweetie, but ya know what? (oh, wait--you obviously ain't even the next thing to sweet)
You seem like you've got one hell of a mouth on you to behold, yourself.
Please. stop. now.
By adamg - 3/17/09 - 2:29 pm
We go through this every few months. You don't need to reply to every single post. Please don't. I'm not going to let Universal Hub become another deserted snakepit like this failed community.
Please feel free to start a blog (www.blogspot.com and www.wordpress.com are both free and easy to use) about how much I suck.
onthattip.info
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 1:14 am
http://onthattip.info
What do you expect? He has
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 1:21 am
What do you expect? He has that trashy Jellz kid promoting and dragging all of his underage friends to the same party (with 3 different names). Expensive lesson learned?
<3
By Jellz - 3/2/09 - 2:19 pm
I love my fans!
<3 <3 <3
hahah i love you jellzy <3
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 3:03 pm
hahah i love you jellzy <3
Free Emarce
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 2:11 pm
Where's Fairey when you need him?
By adamg - 3/2/09 - 2:19 pm
I'm sure he'd have some tips.
Where's Fairey?
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 2:51 pm
everywhere
europe can do it
By jc (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 3:27 pm
Why cant we? Lower the age back to 18. Teach kids to be responsible and respectful of themselves, its a waste of the police forces time to enforce laws that dont, and will never work. Its a cultural problem that wont be rectified until better values are taught to teenagers, and authorities get realistic about what works.
Wishful thinking, jc, but
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/3/09 - 8:08 pm
don't expect all that to happen anytime soon.
big surprise
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 3:38 pm
from what i can tell during albeit brief encounters, eric seems like a pretty nice guy, but he is notorious for having a gaggle of 18 year olds trailing him. i seriously want to say i hear a joke about it almost every time his name comes up. it seems that so few people over the age of 21 show up to his events that instead of 18+ he should be throwing 20- parties with no booze. when some of your massively public facebook invites include descriptives about how the next party is not to be missed because at another wheeler's ice cream party some girl was voluntarily performing certain acts on a guy while ten people watched (your assumption of what i am referring to is probably correct), what kind of crowd do you think you're going to attract? i'm not surprised he got burned. i'm amazed something like this didn't happen sooner.
Ok this is getting out of
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 7:28 pm
Ok this is getting out of hand. First off those pictures aren't even from this past weekend. Second Eric is very good about kicking kids out if they're underage drinking because this is what he does for a living. Third people are trying to make this bigger then it is because he puts on better parties then *CERTAIN PEOPLE* so people are trying to fuck him over. The party was not loud. They did not disturb any of the neighbors. They did not serve underaged drinking they just ASSUMED. What is the big fucking deal like really? I know kids that went to this, got xed and weren't allowed to drink. They have had one party before this. Eric usually djs at clubs. GET OVER IT.
So the police are part of the conspiracy of CERTAIN PEOPLE?
By adamg - 3/2/09 - 7:54 pm
That's basically what you're saying, that the police lied about finding under-aged drinkers behind the blacked out windows.
No, i should of said it off
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 9:23 pm
No, i should of said it off the article, im talking about about the commenters. Trying to make things worse then they are.
You should know, right?
By Kaz - 3/3/09 - 12:45 am
Because you know when things get out of hand when you see it...like underage booze parties at a "closed" ice cream parlor. Nothing about those photos said they were from this past weekend. They are from New Year's Eve. What's your point? It's the same organizers, same host, same DJ, same everything except for the date and time. It is an example of how well Eric or whomever else is responsible for the party is making sure laws are followed (putting aside the whole unlicensed "secret party" thing in the first place).
Also, I have no idea who *CERTAIN PEOPLE* are. Are you suggesting I'm part of some kind of shitty party thrower conspiracy out of jealousy? It's more that I don't like being feed a line of crap by people who want to ignore responsibility and lie in a desir to keep shirking the law. They didn't call the cops on themselves for loud music and a fight. You can lie about the whole thing here all you want, but the reality is that these parties were illegal and everything from how they were advertised to how they were run to how they were found out pretty much points to why they were illegal and that the owners, supporters, and promoters knew it. I hope the cops start taking a closer look at other places "Throwed" likes to host its 18+ parties like the Great Scott (also so damn loud you can hear the crap they play on the weekend from your car driving by on Harvard). It's really craptacular to walk by the front of that place between 1 and 2:30 AM on the weekend with a bunch of drunk teens and teen-pluses yelling to and at each other as they stumble towards cabs and elsewhere.
homeboy needs money. he
By anon (not verified) - 3/2/09 - 9:09 pm
homeboy needs money. he charged kids 10 bucks to get served booze when they usually cant get it elsewhere. obviously they'll pay for it. this is no different from a keg party in a basement, except eric wont let kids party in his retirement home.
Unfortunate
By anon (not verified) - 3/3/09 - 6:34 pm
While the entire event on Saturday night was completely wrong, minus the alcohol it wouldn't have been a big ordeal. A simple noise complaint with a party getting shut down. Regardless of that, it's unfortunate that people are bringing other LEGAL 18+ parties under scrutiny for the faults of this one event. The laws in place for 18+ parties in Boston are actually much stricter than those on a normal event, so whoever is throwing the event must jump through more hoops to put them on. Kids who get caught drinking get kicked out, and the parties end according to normal curfew laws. It doesn't make any sense to judge all of the legitimate 18+ nights based on what happened at Wheeler's.
Often enough, though,
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/4/09 - 10:10 pm
certain rules and policies are set as a response to a recent event gone amok, or some negative occurrences in a place or places where tougher policies and rules are made up.
Frankly, in this instance, I think that people who look suspiciously young really should be carded prior to entering a place that serves alcohol.
Also, when an event is already rowdy, the presence of alcohol can and will magnify the situation, possibly leading to more serious incidents, perhaps such as vandalism or assaults.
okay really
By anon (not verified) - 3/7/09 - 9:25 pm
They probably should just lower the drinking age. Why do you think teens go to things like this? It's actually more fun and actually safer in my opinion. Teens are going to party and get drunk no matter what. There is a good chance a teen is getting blasted over a buddy's house right now with the intentions of driving home. Someone right now is having a drunk hook up. some ones stuff is being destroyed and/stolen. Neighbors are complaining. there are beer pong tables in excess. some parent somewhere is unaware that there are a bunch of kids in their house. no adult supervision. no support system. So wtf. really. We go to these parties to dance and have fun. People who get too carried away get booted out, ive seen it. They do card. They do have a system. The X's do work as far as serving alcohol. You get inside you dance and have fun. There's no place to park and the party doesn't get out till 2 and the trains aren't running, you get in a cab. And like people are saying, If it werent for the drinking, the noise complaint wouldnt have been a problem. That statement alone clearly shows that nothing was out of line. there was no problem other than noise. nothing bad came from it. E-marce is not a dead beat. hes giving good people a place to go have fun. Not all teens are irresponsible. not all of us are rowdy people who like to destroy property and start fights. If they had places like this for teens it would be better off. You could be more open and honest about it. People wouldnt have to hid what they do. If it were legal it would make things easier and safer for teens to do what they do regardless if its legal or not
Let's agree to disagree on lowering the drinking age.
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/8/09 - 12:40 am
The best idea would be if more places had what are called "under 21" nights, where no alcohol is served, and teenagers could go and have fun, without alcohol, and all the alcohol-related crap that goes along with it. Either that, or maybe there should be more clubs that're exclusively for people under 21 to go, where alcohol isn't served. There's yet another reason for raising the drinking age back up to 21; the immature brain of a teenager isn't physically developed enough to handle alcohol.
So, you think it's OK for teens (or anybody) to drink and drive
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/8/09 - 12:45 am
So...you think it's OK for teens (or anybody, for that matter), to get totally intoxicated and drive home or wherever afterwards and to endanger other people? Frankly, I don't, especially because they often take other people with them if and when they end up badly hurt or even dead as a consequence of alcohol related automobile accidents.
A modest proposal
By neilv - 3/8/09 - 12:57 am
Teens are allowed to drink once they reach the age of 18 and pass a 5th grade literacy test.
That's funny as hell, neilvandyke--honestly, but
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/8/09 - 1:04 am
I have to stand by my positions.
It's not a question of brain
By neilv - 3/8/09 - 1:53 am
It's not a question of brain development. It's a question of character development.
If a person is old enough to drive a car, to have sex, to get married, to have children, to be tried as an adult, to be sent off to war... then they're old enough to drink.
The legal drinking age of 21 throughout the US has to do with drunk driving. Not enough parents are raising their children to be sufficiently responsible and intelligent as young adults, and nobody thinks that telling parents that would solve the problem, so the authorities resort to making drinking by young adults illegal, which means *more difficult*.
I rather like my idea of tying drinking rights to legal adulthood (18) with the additional requirement that the young adult must exhibit basic literacy. Until a person can string together two sentences in a logical manner, and without unresolved anaphoric references as if they forget there exists a reader outside themself... I doubt they can reason sufficiently well about how to drink without being in a position in which they might then drive drunk.
Imagine the peer pressure to pay attention in school, so as not to be labeled "too dumb to drink." :)
I've got it
By anon (not verified) - 3/8/09 - 7:18 am
Legal drinking age = 18 unless you have a driver's license, in which case it's 21.
In most, if not all of the European countries,
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/9/09 - 10:34 am
the legal age for a driver's license is 18, as opposed to 16 1/2, like it is in most places here in the United States. Frankly, I think sixteen and a half is still too young for a driver's license, but OK for a learner's permit. If a kid is too young at 16 and a half to enter the military, then they're too young to have a driver's license.
Sorry, neilvandykem, but physiological development
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/9/09 - 10:32 am
Sorry, neilvandyke, but phyiological development, including the brain does come into play here. A teenager's brain is not physically developed enough to handle alcohol, and can do a great deal of damage, which, if it doesn't show up right away, will show up later.
Character development, on the other hand, in this case, means having the good, common sense to realize what one's limits are. If someone's not aware of what one's limits really are by the time they 're 18, it's pathetic, imho.
I think the bottom line with teenage drinking
By Pete Nice - 3/9/09 - 10:42 am
is that when the drinking age was raised from 18-21 in different states at different times, the drunk driving death rate went down by a HUGE number.
What they do in Italy or Canada won't bring down those drunk driving death numbers in the US.
And I doubt any state rep. wants to put his name on a bill knowing that the death rate will probably go up.
Change the driving age
By anon (not verified) - 3/9/09 - 10:48 am
Of the two activities drinking and driving, the driving is by far the most dangerous. Of course they're much more dangerous in combination.
Raise the driving age. Lower the drinking age. Let them walk it off.
Good, concise point, Pete Nice.
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/9/09 - 10:48 am
I don't know anything about alcohol policies in Italy or Canada, but this:
is something that we can agree on.
Find me a study
By Kaz - 3/9/09 - 12:00 pm
Ok, look, you keep asserting that 18-20 year old brains are some how physically undeveloped for "handling alcohol". Give me a reference. The biggest changes end by about the age of 16-18 and every study I've ever seen says that LARGE amounts of alcohol cause losses in cognitive function. Alcohol abuse is alcohol abuse and should be dealt with no matter the age. Nobody's brain is equipped to handle large amounts of alcohol. But when it comes to whether an 18 year old or a 21 year old handle it better, it's about the same. Any younger than about 16-18 is a different story.
While it's true that NOBODY's brains is equipped to handle
By independentminded (not verified) - 3/9/09 - 1:00 pm
excessive amounts of alcohol, a teenager's brain is even less equipped, because, like the rest of the body and its internal organs, it's still developing physically. A teenager's brain is not the same as an adult's brain, regardless of what people say or think. It's common sense.