Nipomo residents attack arsonist

February 14, 2014

arsonA 35-year-old man accused of arson and vandalism was injured when a person attempted to stop him from vandalizing homes in Nipomo by hitting him with a 2×4 piece of wood.

Jacob Bernerd, 35, of Nipomo suffered a skull fracture and was transported to a local hospital. San Luis Obispo Sheriff deputies are searching for the person who assaulted Bernerd.

Shortly after 9 p.m. on Wednesday, deputies were called to assist Cal Fire with a house fire at 1325 La Quinta Drive. At around the same time, residents in the area were reporting a man on a bicycle who was threatening neighbors while smashing car and residential windows.

A group of residents then began fighting with Bernerd. When officers arrived to the area of 1350 La Loma Drive, Bernerd was already suffering from a head injury.

Bernerd is facing charges of arson and vandalism. The sheriff’s department is asking anyone with information on the assault of Bernerd is to call (805) 781-4550.

Get real-time updates by liking CCN on Facebook.

 


Loading...
womanwhohasbeenthere

Sounds to me like the citizens did the right thing. I thought it was called self-defense or defense of your property. I hope no one down there rats out anyone who went after this POS.


Arson is one of the more difficult crimes to prove for a number of reasons. He’ll probably plea bargain down to a lesser (read: misdemeanor) charge, the vandalism charges will be dropped, and he’ll get off with minimal jail time due to overcrowding from the realignment program.


Why the police would go after the folks who successfully stopped this guy is completely beyond me. This guy may have been high on PCP which tends to give the user incredible physical strength. I say good for the neighbors- if more people were willing to get involved perhaps we wouldn’t have as much child abductions, shootings, etc.


panflash
Citizen

So what was Bernerd using to smash car windows–possibly a 2×4?


Who said that he was hit with a 2×4, the out of control Bernerd? Maybe he accidentally hit himself while swinging and knocking out windows.


That’s my story and I’m going to stick to it.


Pelican1
Ted Slanders

The godly inspired passages below allows the pseudo-christian to seek reparations against the criminal, as in this case with Jacob Bernerd.


When the Hebrew God use to speak to his chosen people all the time, but doesn’t do it today for some reason, he proffered this very important command. To wit: [The Lord speaking]  “The one who has stolen what was set apart for destruction will himself be burned with fire, along with everything he has, for he has broken the covenant of the LORD and has done a horrible thing in Israel.”  (Joshua 7:15)


To vouchsafe the above passage: “But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,  BURN FOR BURN, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” (Exodus 21: 23-25)


In other words, the residents that inflicted the damage upon Jabob Bernerd were just following the Hebrew-Christian bible in that they were taking vengeance without mans laws! “We ought to obey God rather than men.” (The Apostle Peter, Acts 5:29)


Always remember; “Cursed is the man who withholds justice from the alien, the fatherless or the widow.” Then all the people shall say, “Amen!” (Deuteronomy 27:19 )


Can all Christians give us an “amen?”


sloweb

Amen is the red icon, right?


Ted Slanders

sloweb,


Yes, it obviously is the red icon.


I just don’t understand it, in that I was just using biblical hermeneutics as the many pastors do from their pulpits of America on Sunday mornings, to prove anything they need to prove. Pseudo-christians should be use to this act. Oh well.


NorthCountyGuy

The criminal got what he deserved.


achillesheal

My kind of neighborhood! Nobody saw the 2×4, tell the cops “he fell”.


shelworth

Next time, if you hold your elbow higher, you will generate more power and we won’t have to pay for a trial or to incarcerate him. I know, I know, I’m wicked and uncaring because he obviously had a bad childhood, etc, etc, blah blah blah. Wah, cry me a river all you bleeding heart liberals who think we should bend over backwards for someone who tries to burn strangers to death!


jrstone

Wow! Attack someones political leanings to justify your contempt for how the law is suppose to work. California Law states a person can use “reasonable force” to keep a person from fleeing a felony until law enforcement arrives. I think trying to cave his skull in goes just a little past that mark. And why does the law seem to “protect” this “suspected” low life? Because some would take the hands of justice and tie them behind the back of the Lady so they can improve their home run swing and encourage others to do the same, all the while denying their new “baseball” the right to his or her day in court. And why stop there, shelworth? Why not encourage more to be like Micheal Dunn in Florida (shooting a kid over loud music) that way we wouldn’t need the expense of the courts at all?


Equal protection under the law and due process are the things that keeps our society civil. The notion of being “innocent until proven guilty” has all but been forgotten in this country and with the type of encouragement you provide who needs it anyway, right?


Thank God you only represent the few…


Just Sayin’…


LameCommenter

Uh, Stone, I hate to tell you, but Shelworth represents the MAJORITY of thinking, honest, lawful citizens. You’re just angry because Shel nailed liberalism for what it is.


jrstone

No, he does not. Only in the convoluted self absorbed mind of an extreme right winger would any conclusion like that have a chance of surviving.


Definitions of liberalism:


“The belief in the value of social and political change in order to achieve progress.”


“A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.” (notice the reference to “law”, something right wingers seem only to apply to their own values and when it convenient to do so)


As with all extreme right wingers you have taken a very basic philosophy, one that embraces progress, and turn it into some sort of cuss word.


I don’t embrace the entirety of any political view, I have my own thoughts and will rely on those rather than those along party lines or their often self-serving agendas, including those of the Liberal left.


My statement was only to point out that attacking a person with the intent to kill them is wrong, even if he is, in your opinion and in the heat of the moment, breaking the law, and had nothing to do with Liberalism or any other political leanings.


The state is guilty of this, trying to kill people wrongly convict of a crime, (overturned death sentences because of DNA testing proves that) and they have far more controls then a bunch of people acting out with a “mob mentality” that is never derived, or controlled, with rational thought.


And to imply that “honest, lawful” citizens best represent your view, and that of shelworth’s, really implies that these folks would break the law if they felt it was the expedient thing to do and when they don’t feel the law is doing enough. I would hope they would say a very loud “Hell No!” to that. Or, embrace the same standards for themselves and their family…


Just Sayin’…


shelworth

When a “Liberal” reads an article like this, they think “how did society fail this poor misunderstood person and how can we make everything better for them so they don’t act out like this in the future”, a Conservative reads the same article and thinks “how can we keep scumbags like this from doing it again”.

No matter how much you want people to be ants, they are not. They are unique individual animals that will react with violence when attacked. What would you have the witnesses do? stand by and watch their neighbors burn? Wring their hands at the social injustice of it all? I applaud them for taking care of their own.


jrstone

I would applaud them also if they limited their response to what is set down by the law. Keep the bad guy there and let law enforcement do their job and then allow the justice system to do theirs.


I hope this isn’t to far off track but I want to add this to the conversation:


In 1968 a man that witnessed one of the two most talked about and infamous assignations in this countries history took a high road I would challenge anyone of you out there to try and emulate let alone question.


Bobby Kennedy had been shot, the gun was right in front of the face of his wife’s bodyguard, the bodyguard had certain knowledge from what he had seen of the type of wound Bobby Kennedy had suffered that the man was dead. There was no doubt. He wrestled the gun from the assassins hands, took him to the ground and when he saw he could no longer protect or do anything for his FRIEND he did what none of you would have the guts to do, he protected the assassin from the crowd who wanted to kill him:


“Bobby [Kennedy] was down. They couldn’t help him … and so they came to get after [Sirhan Sirhan], and they started to pummel him … and I just fought them off because I was not going to allow [them] to commit a murder on this man, and so I protected him. … though he had hurt a friend that we all loved and the damage that was done. After we found out that [Kennedy’s injuries] were fatal, it made a big impact on our nation, on our world. Yet, we had an opportunity to say, ‘We do our thing in a different way. We don’t take some weapon and shoot people that we disagree with,’” he says.


I got to meet him, one of my boyhood idols, as a young man working at the Balboa Bay Club in Newport Beach, California. He was standing along side Merlin Olsen, Don Drysdale and Sandy Koufax, God I couldn’t move! If Jerry West had been there I would have been sure I had died and gone to heaven! In the midst of these giants of men Rosey Grier stood heads above them all. I was able to say hello, that’s all my mouth and body would allow me to do.


I think back on that now and I sure wish I would have had the opportunity and the foreknowledge to ask Mr. Grier how he would address those of you that think violence begetting violence is what should be done.


He watched a man that he loved, from a family that he loved, get gunned down right in front of him. Sirhan Sirhan was in his grip, he could have done wanted he wanted to this mole of a man and no body would have questioned him and he most assuredly would have been held in high regard by the vast majority! But he chose to protect him.


Question that! And then look well into yourself and see who the mole of a man is now….


Just Sayin’….


Moderator

‘I hope this isn’t to far off track” “Bobby Kennedy”


Way way off track and you knew it..

Further “Liberal” vs “Conservative” threads will be deleted.

Repeat offenders will disappear.


jrstone

And with that I’ll say goodbye…


Just Sayin’ No More….


OnTheOtherHand

I can’t speak for the people at hand during this incident but if I had been there I could easily see myself doing something much like this. It was not a simply a matter of “taking the law into their own hands.” It was a matter of stopping further serious damage to property and very possibly a threat to life.


It is more likely than not that the Sherriff’s Dept. could have arrived in time to stop this lunatic from doing much more harm. You can talk all you want about using minimum force to restrain someone but unless you know that he is physically weak and unarmed, you would be wise to do whatever you can to disable him quickly before he has a chance to direct his malevolence at you. Even if he was unarmed and you were a strong capable fighter, it would not be unwise to attempt to cripple him with a single blow. If he was armed, knocking him out with a 2×4 (or whatever) would be sensible. There are some gun owners who quote “it is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6” as a reason for using guns in self-defense. This case is only slightly less serious than the scenario to which they refer.


OnTheOtherHand

2nd paragraph, first line: “couldn’t” not “could.”


choprzrul

“…autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties…”


Your definition of Liberalism cannot possibly be assigned to the current statists running Sacramento and Washington DC.


kettle

shelworth represents no one.

Not even himself, the name is fake.


achillesheal

If confronted with deadly force, one can use deadly force to protect themselves and retreat is not necessary if they are not the initial aggressor. The perpetrator was threatening people, while smashing car and home windows and is suspected of arson. Scary situation I would say. Anyone so brazen is a substantial threat to people’s lives. Was he breaking windows with his bare hands or with an object. Did he wield that object at the people trying to stop him? This maniac needed to be stopped immediately to keep people safe,.


sloweb

I hope that SLO Co Sheriffs are looking for the assailant so they can give him a reward and their appreciation for stopping Bernard.


Probably not :(


doggin

They’ll probably charge this person with attempted murder, assault and whatever else they can drum up. Then the jackass who got his ass handed to him will have one of SLO counties finest do a charity case in which he assists white trash buy while he sues the county, the neighborhood and the individual who unfortunately did not finish the job as he should have. Welcome to paradise.


NorthCountyGuy

The courts, jails, police, etc. are about making a profit, not justice.


LameCommenter

..and courts jails police are also about picking and chosing cases and laws they will enforce, over-enforce, or abandon and ignore. Don’t blame them they are only following locally the President’s six year lead-by-example, and that of his attorney general and IRS.


jrstone

Wow! Most of those officials you speak of would probably align themselves more with the right rather then the left. To imply that Obama, or his administration or it’s appointees, are the defining factor on how they choose to use their discretion would probably piss a few of them off.


But then again, that’s probably your intention, in some small way. You probably think by calling them out as “Obama” followers you’ll somehow piss them off enough so they’ll do their job in such a way as you see fit, rather than how the law defines it to be done. A little “passive aggressive” stuff goin’ on there, LameCommenter?


And how does that really apply to people bashing the heads in of those still only suspected of breaking a law? How? Or maybe you’re implying that we should use this same method of vigilante style justice on those in power?


Now please tell us; would you still condone this type vigilante style justice you are a proponent of if used on you, or a member of your family?


Just Sayin’…


Moderator

The President is not in Nipomo.

Please do not derail.


justchuck

well-named!