Front Page  »  

Suspected SLO bank robber turns himself in

June 12, 2013
Steven Daniel Celaya

Steven Daniel Celaya

A San Luis Obispo man identifying himself as the recent robber of two local banks turned himself in to the San Luis Obispo Police Department Tuesday.

Around 7 a.m. Tuesday, Steven Celaya went to the police department and said he had robbed Chase Bank in San Luis Obispo on May 25 and Bank of America in Atascadero on June 7.

San Luis Obispo police searched Celaya’s house Tuesday afternoon and found some evidence.

Police say their investigation so far has corroborated Celaya’s account of the robberies. The investigation is ongoing.

 


Loading...
Subjects:                 
Related:


14 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The bottom line is the FACT that the cause was the banks giving away easy loans in the first place allowing an individual to get into a house with basically NO CREDIT RATING.

———————————

Of course it’s “a” cause. But things can’t always be reduced to 1 one cause. In this case, it took 2 to tango and the other half of that tango you are talking about were 10s and 10s of millions of Americans who were greedy and dishonest and they were equally “a” cause.


It wasn’t them v. us. It was us v. us. We took ourselves down with greed and stupidity.


0

He must have heard there’s more drugs in county jail than on the outside. That, and three hots and a flop.


0

As many drugs in prison as outside (maybe) but not more in county. Dumb comment made from attitude

not knowledge.

In addition to gooball logic this person can’t write. Doesn’t know the difference between there is (there’s)

and there ARE.


0

Steven Celaya is a sap! What a fool to turn himself in just because he robbed a couple of greedy banks.


Steven Celaya should be held as a microcosm of a pay back to Bank of America and Chase banks for causing, in part, the worldwide economy downturn by their high risk mortgages, subprime loans, swaps, dirivities, etc., all based upon GREED.


Here Steven Celaya will go to jail for stealing from tthe banks, but the banksters that stole billions of dollars from the citizens, and the ramifications therof, are still operating and doing business as usual. What’s wrong with that picture?


Steven was just taking a Bonnie and Clyde and a Robin Hood stance by stealing from the rich , and giving the money stolen to the poor, himself. What a fool.


0

He is now eligible for free room and board, medical, dental that we fund. I would not call him a fool, who know what life he has live before this opportunity. I say, just give him to the bank and let them feed him.


0

Bingo,

A truly short sighted crime, with possible substance abuse behind the urgent need to rob a bank, then turn oneself in a few days later…


0

So based on your perception, two wrongs make a right? Wow!


Sure he was stealing from the rich to give to himself. But the end product was dope. Did he really need that to survive? I didn’t think so. And no, I don’t want to hear one of your biblical quotes justifying this dirtbag’s crimes.


0

Answer4U,


Uh, where in the story does it say anything about dope? Do you have an “all seeing eye” into the past where you can retrieve what is not shown to us? Cool.


Sorry, but Jesus would be mad at me of being remiss if I did’t give you some godly quotes relative to this story. You’re welcome.


“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9)


See? If Steven is a Christian, all he has to do is confess his sin of stealing, and he will be forgiven by the Hebrew AND Christian part of the bible God.


Conversely, if the banksters are at all Christians amongst their CEO’s, then they too should forgive Steven in a Christian way and drop all charges if they want their sins forgiven, especially by tanking this economy! “For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.” (Matthew 6:14)


You see, with the Christian “Forgiveness Doctrine,” one doesn’t really have to be moral or ethically correct at all times like those damn atheists do. This is because the believer of the bible always has a godly way out when they commit any wrongdoing! Praise Jesus! Get it?


0

Ted Slanders,


I understand the forgiveness doctrine but don’t agree that it applies in this particular case. There are more players here than greedy “banksters” and CEO’s. Those of us who hold accounts at these banks are also victims to this man’s crimes (e.g. it’s OUR money he stole and FDIC rates increase as a result of losses not to exclude bank robberies/thefts. Those rates are passed on to us, the customers). Therefore, we as the shareholders in these financial institutions ought not to adopt the forgiveness doctrine because that serves as NO deterrent for others to commit similar crimes against us. In this particular case and all other similar cases, I would endorse penal substitution as a component of ultimate forgiveness.


I’ve known Steven for years. For a long time now, he’s struggled with costly addictions to illicit drugs.


Good day.


0

Answer4U,


“I understand the forgiveness doctrine but don’t agree that it applies in this particular case.”


WHAT?! Where in the hell do YOU get the authority to know more than the INSPIRED WORD of the Hebrew-Christian God and Saint John by stating the Forgiveness Doctrine doesn’t imply in this case? Please inform us why YOU know more than God’s direct word upon this topic! Blaspheme!


Don’t be giving us that old penal substitution as the ultimate forgiveness crapola. God’s direct word is the ultimate and is specific in this matter, barring any man made laws of interference!


“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9) This passage is very specific, in that one’s sins will be forgiven if they confess them, PERIOD! No maybe’s, if’s, or but’s!


If you know Steven, then I would suggest that you head on over to the banks in question and ask the manager of same if they are Christians. If they answer yes, then I would show them the specific passages that I have given in relation to Steven’s wrongdoings. Subsequently, if Steven is not forgiven by these banksters, then they go directly agaisnt the word of the Hebrew-Christian God and they will burn in hell!


It’s truly hard to believe that when I converse with anyone that states that they know more than God’s inspired word. It’s actually comical.


You are guilty of the following, to wit: “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” (1 Timothy 4:3)


0

There is no such thing as “God”s direct word. Only guys who wrote words

which lemmings use to pick and choose on what they choose to espouse.


0

Here Steven Celaya will go to jail for stealing from tthe banks, but the banksters that stole billions of dollars from the citizens, and the ramifications therof, are still operating and doing business as usual. What’s wrong with that picture?

—————————–

Well, there’s certainly been some Banksters as you call them in the last couple of years overcharging and over-foreclosing etc. that did amount to billions. But the big one, the trillion dollar one that took us into recession is not on the banksters, no it is on every greedy American who took out a liar loan and then walked away from their agreed upon repayment obligations when the real estate market tanked. There simply is no defense that says “you should have known I was a good for nothing liar who didn’t have the wherewithal to pay back that money you loaned me so I shouldn’t have to pay it back”.


0

abigchocoholic,


The first law of the universe; cause and effect. The bottom line is the FACT that the cause was the banks giving away easy loans in the first place allowing an individual to get into a house with basically NO CREDIT RATING. Then, when the house of cards collapsed, many lost their jobs and couldn’t pay the mortgage payments, and the rest is history.


The banks didn’t care about the easy mortgage lending because they bundled it up in AAA to B loan packages and sold it to others at a prophet as investments in their runaway financial speculation schemes!


In the more rational days before the banks became gambling casinos, one actually had to qualify for a mortgage loan by equating your income, verse the overall payment, property taxes, etc., before you were given the loan. If you didn’t qualify at this time, you looked for a smaller home and/or waited until your income arose realtive to the loan you were trying to get. 2+2=4.


No, don’t give the banksters any leeway whatsoever, because in part, they’re the ones that set the entire worlds economy on a downturn because of having to cover the credit default swaps sold with those mortgage backed securities. It is estimated that the banking swindle has cost the nation $27 trillion, at least $16 trillion admitted to by the Federal Reserve in “loans” and “bailouts” (actually buy-backs) from foreign investors!


Cause and effect.


0

You’re partially correct here but you’re sense of proportion is WAY off. The big banks and mortgage lenders (assisted by real estate sales people) worked hard to sell these high-risk loans to people who shouldn’t have received them. While their were plenty of prospective home-owners who did this out of greed, they were vastly outnumbered by those who did it from a combination of fiscal ignorance and reliance on advice from people who had huge incentives to get them into the loans.


In other businesses, such people would be considered con-artists and sleazeballs. For some reason (media talking points dictated by puppets of this industry?), our society seems to have given them a pass. We don’t excuse car dealers that knowingly sell cars with undeclared defects causing premature failures because the customer trusted their statement as to the quality of the vehicle. Why not treat those that sold loans doomed to fail the same way?


At least the auto industry warranties their products and (usually) backs them up. The bankers sold off the bad loans to other suckers and unloaded their liability in the process. (See Ted Slanders’ diatribe for more details.)


0