Front Page  »  

Ax-wielding man attacks campers, officer fight back

June 12, 2016

ax1An ax-wielding man attacked fellow campers, officers and a firefighter during a Saturday rampage at the Santa Ynez River Recreation Area in Santa Barbara County.

At about 3:45 p.m., callers reported a fellow camper was combative and appeared to be on drugs. Ilya Yegudkin, 25, of Los Angeles allegedly cut up his tent, vandalized a car, threw axes as other campers and assaulted several people including an elderly man who had been sitting in a truck.

“The male subject was reportedly wielding two axes and had thrown them at people,” Santa Barbara County Sheriff officials said in a press release. “He had also attempted to fight a Santa Barbara County Firefighter who responded to the scene.”

When deputies arrived, they located Yegudkin who attempted to fight with them. During the struggle to detain him, one deputy received a facial laceration.

While trying to subdue Yegudkin, deputies utilized pepper spray, a Taser gun, a bean bag shotgun and police batons. During the arrest, officers injured Yegudkin who was transported to a hospital where he was admitted.

The injured deputy was treated and released from the hospital.

Yegudkin was booked in absentia on charges of assault with a deadly weapon, felony resisting arrest, battery causing serious injury and physical elder abuse. Once he is released from the hospital he will be booked into the Santa Barbara County Jail.


Loading...
Subjects:             
Related:


21 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Business as usual for the morally-insane dirtbags of L.A.


0

What kind of training have these deputies received that they try to fight with a guy swinging an axe and they didn’t just shoot him? Dumb.


0

Where are the cries of the progressive liberals…we need axe control legislation?


0

He probably only had wood-handled axes, and not the dreaded black plastic “assault” axes.


0

and exactly how many people were killed by this axe wielding individual (or axe wielding individuals in general)?


0

What’s your point?


0

Drugs, prop 47, abolishment of involuntary psychiatric intervention. Need I say more?


0

Civility is not taught or practiced in California anymore. We have been overwhelmed by the thug mentality. Everyone wants to be a badass.


0

It is not just California but most of the country and I put the media and their sensationalism and fear-mongering largely to blame.


0

When Hillary gets the guns, law abiding citizens will be at the mercy of those with axes, knives, and such.


0

Camping in California is not what it used to be. Back in the day, disruptive, combative behavior was not sanctioned. Today, considerate campers are expected to either put up with the likes of Yugudkin or leave. Yugudkins have literally taken over campgrounds and run the law-abiding, family-friendly occupants out! For YEARS, our neighbors enjoyed a favorite, secluded camping spot in the Sierra. Last year after one final “attempt” to camp there with their extended family (including young children), they made the difficult decision to never return. In graphic detail they described how the USDA Forest Service primitive campground is totally trashed with hypodermic needles, soiled disposable diapers, food wrappers, etc., including loud music broadcast on speakers day and night and foul-mouthed, rude individuals. US Forest Service employees do not regularly patrol the campground, and our neighbor’s complaints to government personnel have fallen on deaf ears! Provincial Park campgrounds in British Columbia, in stark contrast, have zero tolerance for anything less than considerate, quiet campers. Alcohol in moderation is allowed and campers who choose to disregard the rules are promptly escorted out. California tolerates anything/everything except law-abiding citizens. Wrong and sad.


0

Agreed, new trucks,fancy camps, Camp ground prices as high as motel rooms, adventure pass programs that are “temporary” but never ended,dozens camp hosts, USFS and contract workers in one place, and yet their to damn lazy to step out of their air conditioned trucks and picks up the trash right in front of their vehicle when driving around. Bitch at the getto blasting imbeciles and you get shot by some crack head punk, complain and they do shit or you end up getting kicked out. Pure sugar coated bullshit is what Calif government is.


0

This is largely a result of budget cuts to the USFS which began over 20 years ago. The conservatives in congress were intent on forcing the Forest Service to get users to pay their own way to a much greater extent. This resulted in higher campground fees, the Adventure Pass system and many fewer employees to patrol campgrounds, maintain infrastructure. It has gotten steadily worse since then as the combination of cost, inconvenience and degradation drives people away.


You don’t get more than what you pay for and if you want lands open to public use there is a cost involved. Our elected officials have decided that is a much lower priority than giving subsidies to multi-national corporations, tax breaks to Wall St. and, of course, unnecessary and counter-productive interference in the politics of third-world hell holes. The Canadian Parks are heavily subsidized by taxpayers and they can afford to keep them up.


0

He should have been shot and killed on sight.


0

Sounds like they pretty much used their entire arsenal to subdue the guy. If he didn’t stop, that probably would have been their next alternative.


0

The fact that he was able to injure an officer is reason enough he should have lethally dealt with. If more of the public were armed and trained any willing to act this would have ended a lot sooner. Same reason one person in Florida was able to kill 50 without any of the sheeple trying to protect themselves.


0

You’re wrong! Dead wrong! The individual that killed 49 people and wounded 53 others was approached and engaged by an off-duty peace officer acting as security for the Pulse, they exchanged gun fire! A trained peace officer was incapable of stopping this “nut” and you suggest that an untrained individual with a gun, maybe even more than one, would have done better? That argument is old and worn out and isn’t proven! The one thing you can take out of the human + gun equation is the gun part.


You owe an apology to those folks who were killed and or injured, to their families and to the whole of the LGTB community, both in Orlando and the country; your “sheeple” description of those who were either killed or wounded is a both inaccurate, insulting and places part of, if not all of, the blame on the victims.


I applaud the the public safety officers who responded to the Santa Ynez River Recreation Area! Their use of less than deadly force is an example of how it’s supposed to be done, especially when the officers themselves were not facing a deadly force (there is no mention of the suspect having any type of weapon when he was contacted by law enforcement).


0

We must all recognize we are at war. One can choose to be warrior defending his or her way of life, maybe to the death. The alternatives are political victim, collateral damage, or the enemy. You reference a security guard who confronted the attacker. I ask about the other hundreds of people there. Were they merely relying on someone else to defend them? Why do you play the “LGBT” card? I said nothing about that. The sheep mentality transcends all demographics. I stand by my comments. I do not suggest that untrained persons try to use weapons. I declare that more people should be willing to commit to their own security and accept that they may be required to act in an aggressive manner to protect themselves and others around them. Training is paramount. Please reread my previous comment. I assert that had more people been of such a mind set the casualty numbers would have been far lower.


As pertains to your comments about the axe attacker and the LEOs not experiencing a lethal situation, I ask how did one then receive a facial laceration? Any number of persons at the camp ground would have been justified in using deadly force in that situation.


In your other comment you claim to accept the use of deadly force as a last resort, “Dead Last”, you say. How many people must die before it becomes justified?


0

At war?!!! Seems to me we’re at war with the NRA and their minions. And what you meant to say isn’t what you said; your post made it very clear that those who were shot that evening were “sheeple” in your opinion. And the “card” you speak of me using is just another way of taking away from the fact that a high powered gun with the capability firing many rounds without reloading was used to kill 49 people! That’s the fact of the matter! And your pure speculation that having many armed people in that place would have somehow stopped this is pure nonsense based on no facts whatsoever.


The “Urban Dictionary” defines “sheeple” as “People unable to think for themselves. Followers. Lemmings. Those with no cognitive ablilities of their own.” Wikipedia defines “sheeple” as “…people compared to sheep in being docile, foolish, or easily led.” Sounds like the NRA minions to me…


I’ll leave the question of what defines when deadly force is justified to those who are trained in that area; evidently those trained in the use of deadly force that day in Santa Ynez River Recreation Area chose not to use it. And if you think a facial abrasion justifies lethal force, well…. I just hope you’re not a LEO.


0

Wow! I’m glad you’re not a peace officer or a policy maker! Shot on sight?!!! What about due process and equal protection under the law. What if it’s not drugs and he’s mentally challenged? I agree with the use of lethal force when applicable and as a LAST, DEAD LAST, resort.


Peace officers did their jobs correctly this time.


0

My post was intended as a response to Pelican1’s post….


0