Hey, there! Log in / Register

MS-13 leader admits he ordered deaths of two teens in East Boston

Demente

A Salvadoran national living in East Boston admitted in federal court yesterday that, as a national MS-13 leader, he ordered the deaths of Wilson Martinez, 15, and Cristofer Perez de la Cruz, 16.

The US Attorney's office in Boston reports that Oscar "Demente" Duran, 27, will be sentenced on June 8. He is the 35th of 61 alleged MS-13 members rounded up in 2016 to either plead or be found guilty.

Authorities charged that Duran was the leader of MS-13's Molinos Loco Salvatrucha "clique," both nationally and in East Boston and that he ordered hits on members of the rival 18th Street Gang at a large MS-13 conclave in Richmond, VA.

Martinez was found stabbed on Constitution Beach in September, 2015; Perez de la Cruz was shot to death on Falcon Street in January, 2016.

Even with a plea deal, Duran faces up to life in prison for first-degree murder, being a major MS-13 player and using teenagers in carry out some of the crimes he wanted committed.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Ad:

Comments

Child murderers
These families came here to escape the violence in their native countries and end up slaughtered in our streets.
Thank you BPD and all law enforcement working tirelessly AND risking their lives to fight this scourge.

up
Voting closed 8

The murderer in question belongs behind bars for life, with no parole.

up
Voting closed 14

"Demente', which in Spanish means, "He's cool, don't worry about it" is about to be sentenced.
All the comments are, "Get him off the street"
How about, "Don't let him in the country to be on the street?"
"Molinos Loco Salvatrucha" means, "No, really, he's cool".

Look, there are really dangerous people here. Maybe just a little common sense in our immigration policies? Maybe our deportment policies too?

Sanctuary cities, my ass.

up
Voting closed 4

OK, so you don't give a shit about immigrants, it's your right as a Murrican to hate people whose skin is a different tone than yours, but even from a completely self-interested perspective, you're being kind of stupid. What you keep forgetting is that one of the benefits of immigrants in a sanctuary city is that maybe they feel they can actually talk to the police about criminals in their midst and provide the sort of information, that until your Dear Leader declares national martial law and rescinds the Constitution, is still required to arrest somebody here.

Now before you wipe the spittle off your keyboard and start to compose your libtard-slaying retort, count to ten and think about how and why this particular guy was arrested - along with 60 other people - in sanctuary cities. Maybe, just maybe, police in sanctuary cities are willing to arrest bad guys even if they are foreign born. Maybe, just maybe, they are able to gather enough evidence to obtain arrest warrants in part based on information by people whose skin is different from yours, who are willing to talk to police.

And maybe, just maybe, you'll come to realize that sanctuary cities are not sanctuaries for foreign-born criminals anymore than they are for native criminals who grew up speaking English.

Nah, you're just going to keep misunderstanding what a sanctuary city is. OK, you can start your two-minute hate now.

up
Voting closed 9

Do you actually believe there's no daylight between wanting to enforce borders and immigration laws and not "give[ing] a shit about immigrants" and "hat[ing] on people whose skin is a different tone than yours?" Like you truly can't conceive of a person who isn't a slobbering, knuckle-dragging, zeig-heiling racist who could believe those things?

Or is it something that you don't particularly believe, but don't particularly object to either, so when you get one of those little talking point emails from whatever progressive organization's mailing list(s) you're on, you write it on out here to make conversation?

For the record, I am both trolling and genuinely curious. Strangely enough, the two are not always mutually exclusive. Hence my question.

up
Voting closed 4

OK, your post deserves a response...so...

"OK, so you don't give a shit about immigrants, it's your right as a Murrican to hate people whose skin is a different tone than yours, but even from a completely self-interested perspective, you're being kind of stupid."

Several assumptions here. One is about my skin color. Another is about my self interest. Another is about my intelligence. But, keep it up, it almost fits the narrative.

"What you keep forgetting is that one of the benefits of immigrants in a sanctuary city is that maybe they feel they can actually talk to the police about criminals in their midst and provide the sort of information, that until your Dear Leader declares national martial law and rescinds the Constitution, is still required to arrest somebody here."

I don't forget that. You keep forgetting the word 'illegal' in front of 'immigrants'. Problem here is that the typical illegal immigrant is the ultimate prey for a criminal illegal immigrant.
Check the history of the twentieth century. Legal immigration...and those that preyed on them were their own nationality. This has nothing to do with Trump or anyone else, so your snarky 'Dear Leader' comments simply don't help. Hell, he has trouble enforcing the immigration law as it is written. Laws that were actually enforced by the Lightbringer...

"Now before you wipe the spittle off your keyboard and start to compose your libtard-slaying retort, ...based on information by people whose skin is different from yours, who are willing to talk to police."

Nice, but more bullshit. I did have to replace my keyboard, but that was because of all the popcorn in it. The immigration violation in itself is grounds for arrest. The authorities were building murder cases against these fine fellows. Busting them for immigration violations and sending them home is one thing, they'll be back, but busting them on federal life sentence level allegations is an entirely different thing. Three squares a day on the taxpayer's dime...forever...I'll accept that. They'll never kill another East Boston teenager.

"And maybe, just maybe, you'll come to realize that sanctuary cities are not sanctuaries for foreign-born criminals anymore than they are for native criminals who grew up speaking English."

Then explain the actions of the mayor of Oakland and that idiot state rep from Brockton et.al. that actually broadcast a warning about a non-existent ICE raid there (not to mention her assailing the name of a Civil War general).

"Nah, you're just going to keep misunderstanding what a sanctuary city is. OK, you can start your two-minute hate now."

I used to understand what a sanctuary city is. The 'progressives' keep moving the goalposts. Oh, as far as your repeated 'skin color' remarks...I know a guy, from Roslindale that was born in Guatemala. Light skin, blue eyes, speaks the Spanish version of the Queen's English. He has a lot of fun with that.

So, please knock it off with the skin color bullshit.

up
Voting closed 9

I would tip off every person in fear of ICE that they were coming. Let them try and throw me in jail for it. I have no fear of a bunch of hopped up mall cops that have been allowed off of the leashes that kept their racism in check by a racist traitor.

Fuck them and that scumbag turnkey Tom Hodgson and his new dreamboat Tom Homan..

up
Voting closed 5

"I would tip off every person in fear of ICE that they were coming. Let them try and throw me in jail for it."

I assume that you have no fear of MS13. Proving that you are a total idiot that adds nothing to the conversation.

up
Voting closed 10

I have no fear of MS-13 the same way I have no fear of Richard Spencer.

up
Voting closed 11

than MS-13 ever could.

up
Voting closed 3

can the enforcement of laws that are on the books for all to see, and written in something approximating theoretically comprehensible English, be more damaging to our country than the drug-running, gun-running, and extra-judicial killings perpetrated by MS-13?

That's a hell of a claim to make, so you're going to have to do some work to make that argument fly outside the inside-128 echo chamber. Please cite specific quantitative evidence for your claim and refrain from word-games, non-sequitur appeals to emotion, unsubstantiated assertions or personal opinions presented as fact, and any general sophistry and rhetorical tricks and misdirections.

Ready?

Go!

up
Voting closed 8

I've read some persuasive arguments on why, in this country, really only whites can be racists. I guess you're doing your best to disprove that.

up
Voting closed 7

"I've read some persuasive arguments on why, in this country, really only whites can be racists. I guess you're doing your best to disprove that."

Huh? I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. Probably neither do you.

up
Voting closed 9

Seriously?

You are a piece of work, dude. I'd have thought a guy who thinks of himself as a journalist would have more respect for the meanings of words and the fact that you can't arbitrarily reassign them to score points with people who don't take the time to think too deeply about a debate.

up
Voting closed 3

Which means, in the US, it is whites who have that combo most of the time.

There are some small areas where that dynamic works in different ways, i.e. cops of one nonwhite race systematically persecuting people of another nonwhite race. However, that's the exception.

Remember: Privilege and Power.

up
Voting closed 11

Racism is malevolent action against a person motivated by the ethnicity of the target. Not by the ethnicity of the perpetrator. Not by any real or perceived power dynamic. Not by any notion of "power + privilege" as perceived by a third party who has no skin in the game.

"Power" may be wielded malevolently or benevolently. Race is orthogonal to who wields it or how it is wielded.

"Privilege" does not exist. The United States is largely a meritocracy. Only people who are not willing to play by the same rules everyone else plays by are the ones screaming "privilege" to extract concessions out of people who are successful through their own hard work.

You're a strange case, since you seem to be both successful because of your own hard work (which you love to bring up at every opportunity) but you also love to claim the mantle of marginalization and oppression. Maybe it's a personality tic of yours that only comes out when expressed in forum posts and for all I know you're perfectly solid and reasonable in real life.

up
Voting closed 25

I am sure I am gonna open a big can of worms here but..

Sanctuary cities, my ass.

Like Adam said above you have no idea what a sanctuary city really is. People automatically assume its a free-for-all any undocumented immigrants, criminal record or not. That's pretty far from the truth. As a resident of Chelsea, I can tell you CPD actively fight undocumented immigrants who commit crimes. CPD even helped in this case.

So if we were so 'sanctuary' in the way you describe it, this would have continued and nothing would have been done. So yeah you're kinda wrong here, we DO do something about undocumented immigrants who are criminals.

So please take your ignorance and shove it in four corners.

up
Voting closed 4

As I said above, "I used to understand what a sanctuary city is. The 'progressives' keep moving the goalposts."
See the problem here? I'm not an unreasonable person. I believe that cooperation between the community and the police is vital to get the real bad players. I, personally, know people that are active in this kind of thing and I salute their courage and perseverance.

"So if we were so 'sanctuary' in the way you describe it,"
I offered no definition of 'sanctuary city'.

"So yeah you're kinda wrong here, we DO do something about undocumented [illegal] immigrants who are criminals."
As the law requires. So, when do we get to the point of talking about the police (local) being forced by their leftie virtue-signalling political superiors to ignore ICE detainers? Murder charges are not based on immigration status. They are based on information (yup, from other illegal immigrants that put their lives in danger) and solid proof.

I agree that illegal immigrants whose only crime is crossing the border should not be in danger if they co-operate with police.

Then along comes that idiot Riccio to poison what should be an adult conversation.

So please take your ignorance and shove it in four corners.

up
Voting closed 8

it can deny you everything.

up
Voting closed 5

It can rain.

Aphorisms: The game the whole family can play.

up
Voting closed 5

Fed'ral laws exist
Lefties pretend otherwise
The ICE man cometh

A Sunday in March
Let's play word games to pass time
Thought twists in the wind

up
Voting closed 13

The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 eliminated parole from the Federal system.

up
Voting closed 9

Those "children" didn't escape the violence, they brought it here. Did you miss the part about them being 18th Street gangbangers?

up
Voting closed 2

Not everybody wakes up one morning and thinks ah, what a great day to join a gang and run drugs and kill people. A lot of the younger local gang members were recruited (some at East Boston High School) through intimidation - join the gang or die. Cristofer Perez de la Cruz, in fact, was getting ready to flee back to Guatemala for just that reason when he was killed.

up
Voting closed 11

"Join or die" only works if there's no law. If you've been raised your whole life in a culture where there is no law...then there is no law for you in your own head, regardless of whether there is law in the head of your nextdoor neighbor.

The rule of law only exists if just about everyone believes that it does. Not if 50% +1 person believe it does, not if 60% believe it does, not if 80% believe it does. Only if just about everyone believes that it does. If you're surrounded by people for whom it doesn't...then it doesn't exist for you either.

And of course, if you flout the law to get here, then guess what...there really is no law since you've gone and actively renounced it. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Doesn't make it any less tragic. But there's tragedy, there's explicable tragedy, and then there's predictable tragedy.

And before you start pounding on your keyboard, Adam, maybe you ought to count to ten and ask yourself how many future gang members and how many immigrant murder victims you're willing to trade for how many six figure income techies in Kendal Square or Longwood.

Though don't think on that too long: before you have a stroke trying to come up with new and innovative ways to call me a Commie/Nazi/Pig/Dog/Alt Right/Trump's Secret Gay Porn Star Fuckbuddy, you might recall that this is a false tradeoff, that there is such a thing as good immigration as opposed to bad immigration, that it's generally possible to tell the difference between the two, and you can have good immigration without inviting bad immigration if you enforce the laws uniformly as opposed to capriciously.

up
Voting closed 13

Can I trade a couple of MS-13 members for Melania's parents and a Russian hooker to be named later?

up
Voting closed 8

...a real hooker or a General Hooker?

up
Voting closed 11

Everyone has to earn their stars. No 25-year-old "Generals" need apply.

up
Voting closed 10

I know how you run. You've got to have her picked out now, or the deal's off.

up
Voting closed 12

Immigration in the US has always been a relationship of either ignoring it or hating where the general public is concerned. In some decades its a non-issue. In other decades its the biggest national problem.

Why is it an issue today? Same reasons as the past. Perception that norther whites are loosing power for white folk, perception that immigrants are creating economic competition in a world where there is never enough for anyone. A need for scapegoating, for blaming some group as the evil group de jour. It is harder today to use the usual targets of blame as scapegoats. Gays, blacks, Hispanics, Asians will all fight back. Jews as a target? Would raise the the specter of supporters of another Holocaust.

But immigrants are an easy target. It's easy to get the larger public to be at least confused if not opposed to immigration in general. It's easier to spread FUD (fear, doubt and uncertainty) about a group that most voters probably have little contact with. So immigrants are the scapegoat of the moment.

Roman's attempt to argue that immigration as a whole is bad due to MS-13 reveals an animus against modern immigrants. Just as American's didn't want greasy Pope worshipping Italians decades ago now it's the lawless gangsters who are immigrants and come from lawless societies.

The word salad about lawlessness is not only a poor use of inductive reasoning to try to link immigration with violence but also hypocritical and racist. If by lawless societies the meaning is Central and South American nations then to the extent lawlessness exists the US is largely responsible.

But the broad brush of lawless societies also declares that there are nations which are wholly lawless, as though that is the norm. As though the people in those societies are incapable of living in lawful societies. In other words people who are incapable of living in civilized societies. People who do not have the fill in the blank that allows them to live as civilized citizens. Fill in the blank with genes, "the blood" or race.

This is racism at its fundamental level. Not just an animus against people of a different skin color or hair type. But a belief that there are superior human beings and inferior human beings. Lawless societies are societies composed of individuals incapable of lawful living. In other words inferior human beings.

up
Voting closed 10

Does blood determine culture? Do genes determine culture? If you believe so, then you are a racist. But I never said that. You accused me of it, but I never said it and I never meant to say it, nor did I mean to dance on the hairy edge of saying it.

And you know that what I did say was something entirely uncontroversial: if you believe that blood and genes do not determine culture, but that mindset does, then you are a normal human being.

Intellectual traditions and ideal and social structures evolve right alongside biology. There are, in fact, superior intellectual traditions and there are inferior intellectual traditions. Western liberal democracy, with its emphasis on individual agency, it's centuries-long tradition of education, of science, and its manifest accomplishments in securing material prosperity for its citizens is superior to pre-civilized cultures of tribal warfare, superstition, and subjugation of the individual to the group's whims.

The difference between America and the rest of the world is that we don't believe blood, or genetics, or last names constrain what you can be and whether you can take part in our civilization. We do, however, require some minimal level of assimilation for success. Your genes or your bloodline do not prevent you from doing that, but your mindset can.

People who do not believe in the rule of law do not do very well, materially or socially. Be they Colombian bartenders who run at the sight of police officers or be they white Christian survivalists holed up in the mountains of Idaho, people who don't buy into what we've got going here don't have it as good as people who do.

Read that again before you start frothing at the mouth: people aren't necessarily superior or inferior, but the thoughts and value systems in their heads can be. You've just accused me of being a hypocrite and a crypto-fascist. Clearly you believe the thoughts running around in my head are inferior to yours. Yet you seem to deny that such a thing can be possible when applied to larger ground and schools of thought, and still larger groups and entire cultural values?

I should back up. You didn't actually deny any of that. What you did was you made a bee line to race and genes and blood. It's easier to knock down the straw man that race or genes or blood determine worth, but it's a lot harder to knock down the argument that thoughts and beliefs and values can be conducive to what we in the US define as success or failure.

So again, the question for you, same question I ask everyone who jumps to assert an equivalence between wanting border security and wanting to open up the death camps and gas chambers: do you really believe one requires the other? Do you really not believe one can be for a society that uniformly enforces a minimal set of laws made to benefit its citizens, including laws meant to provide external security, without also being a racist...whatever the definition of racist needs to be to make the charge stick?

up
Voting closed 9

It would be much less expensive than keeping him in a US prison.

up
Voting closed 11

Not only would he be back on the street, but that sends a message to other criminally-inclined that they won't be punished.

Get some social justice for children who live here, so that getting a part-time job and going to school is an option to everyone, and they don't have to fear stray bullets in their neighborhood. Legalize marijuana for real, so that the demand for illegal drugs fueling some of these gangs collapses. And do what we're doing here, which is arrest and prosecute the gang members, and try to make criminal business non-viable in Boston. And have zero-tolerance for gun violence by gangs: you illegally carry a gun and shoot someone as part of criminal gang, and you're going away for good, and everyone else in your gang is charged as accessories, and anyone who harbored those may be charged.

up
Voting closed 12

...you might want to research the criminal penalties for illegal guns in Massachusetts.
Some of the toughest gun penalties in the country. Almost as tough as Chicago.
As far as the rest..are you willing to charge someone's mother with harboring if she's (semi?) clueless? Or someone that is 'gang' by living on the same street? Are you in the Intervale because you live on Intervale St.?
There are practical problems with 'sweeping' reforms...

up
Voting closed 8

I have a target-only LTC. If I'm caught carrying in public, I lose my LTC, I lose my ability to legally buy guns, I get a criminal record, I lose my job, and good luck doing anything other than sweeping floors or Task Rabbit for the rest of my life.

So for me and all the normal people for whom the rule of law exists, Massachusetts' toughest-in-the-nation gun laws have teeth.

For everyone for whom the law doesn't exist, a conviction and loss of (non-existent) LTC doesn't matter. A little time in prison doesn't matter, since you had no prospects outside the informal economy in the first place.

How many times have we seen a photo of a hot pink pistol with mix-and-match ammunition the BPD has posted up when they catch a guy with a half-dozen gun possession convictions on his record?

up
Voting closed 17

Just kill him

up
Voting closed 3

...can we waterboard him first to find out about gangsta stuff?

No, we can't just kill him.

up
Voting closed 16