You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 2:42 p.m.

Teenagers accused of stealing and breaking into cars in Washtenaw, Monroe counties

By Amalie Nash

Authorities believe four teenagers stole several vehicles and broke into many others in Washtenaw and Monroe counties over the last 24 hours.

Police are still investigating whether other individuals were involved and how long the group may have been committing crimes.

Police are urging anyone whose vehicle was broken into over the last 24 hours to contact them.

And Milan Police Chief Jeff Lewis also stressed the importance of protecting valuables, noting that police believe all the vehicles stolen had the keys inside and all the cars entered were unlocked.

"People sometimes think they live in a rural area and it won't happen there, but that's just not the case anymore," Lewis said.

The investigation started early today when an 18-year-old Milan area man attempted to use a stolen credit card at a Milan hotel, Lewis said. Police were called and discovered the man was also in possession of a stolen car.

"When we interviewed him on site, we realized the case was much bigger than one stolen vehicle," Lewis said.

Milan police contacted the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department, Michigan State Police and Monroe County Sheriff's Department. The incidents are believed to have occurred in Milan, York Township, and northern Monroe County.

Lewis said police believe the 18-year-old and three juveniles were involved, but the investigation is still in its early stages. He said it's unclear at this point how many thefts they could be involved in.

Police are seeking felony charges against the 18-year-old, including possession of stolen property, possession of a stolen vehicle and attempted use of a stolen credit card.

Police believe the thieves targeted GPS units, electronics and loose change in unlocked cars. Lewis said police recovered some stolen property and are now trying to match the items with the owners.

Anyone whose car was burglarized in Milan is asked to call Milan police 734-439-1551.

Comments

Mertie

Sat, Aug 21, 2010 : 4:31 p.m.

....and why would anyone leave their keys in their car????? It says "take my car as I am a fool."

Jay Allen

Fri, Aug 20, 2010 : 10:18 a.m.

Reading Comprehension-101 There is nothing about mace at all in the article. Why is it being discussed?

breadman

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 9:35 p.m.

Ya! Why did it go right in to Mace? They were talking about cars... Ie:...broke into and stolen credit cards. Oops! time frame it was here happy hour! I tape a quarter on the bumper so they would steal it! And every morning I get up and its still here. Insurance cost more then the car did. Gets me there and back!

dading dont delete me bro

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 8:48 p.m.

can the wcsd tie these to any in the lincoln district of ypsilanti township? there's been a rash of them down this way recently. i got an email there was one on our street tuesday a.m. if they can, i can sleep better tonight.

DBH

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 8:22 p.m.

Am I missing something? Why the discussion about Mace? I do not see it mentioned in the story.

Gorc

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 6:35 p.m.

What's the chemical difference between pepper spray and mace?

Kent2525

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 4:31 p.m.

@JDM, Mace is a no-no. Pepper spray is ok. Also CS gas is ok.

djm12652

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 3:40 p.m.

@Kent2525...so Mace [a tar-gas] is legal and pepper spray is not?

Kent2525

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 3:04 p.m.

Mace no Pepper Spray yes, or CS gas. http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(zjfq05r5srp3yr55plkdub45))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-224d 750.224d Self-defense spray or foam device. Sec. 224d. (1) As used in this section and section 224, "self-defense spray or foam device" means a device to which all of the following apply: (a) The device is capable of carrying, and ejects, releases, or emits 1 of the following: (i) Not more than 35 grams of any combination of orthochlorobenzalmalononitrile and inert ingredients. (ii) A solution containing not more than 10% oleoresin capsicum. (b) The device does not eject, release, or emit any gas or substance that will temporarily or permanently disable, incapacitate, injure, or harm a person with whom the gas or substance comes in contact, other than the substance described in subdivision (a)(i) or (ii). (2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person who uses a self-defense spray or foam device to eject, release, or emit orthochlorobenzalmalononitrile or oleoresin capsicum at another person is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both. (3) If a person uses a self-defense spray or foam device during the commission of a crime to eject, release, or emit orthochlorobenzalmalononitrile or oleoresin capsicum or threatens to use a self-defense spray or foam device during the commission of a crime to temporarily or permanently disable another person, the judge who imposes sentence upon a conviction for that crime shall consider the defendant's use or threatened use of the self-defense spray or foam device as a reason for enhancing the sentence. (4) A person shall not sell a self-defense spray or foam device to a minor. A person who violates this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor. (5) Subsection (2) does not prohibit either of the following: (a) The reasonable use of a self-defense spray or foam device containing not more than 10% oleoresin capsicum by a person who is employed by a county sheriff or a chief of police and who is authorized in writing by the county sheriff or chief of police to carry and use a self-defense spray or foam device and has been trained in the use, effects, and risks of the device, while in performance of his or her official duties. (b) The reasonable use of a self-defense spray or foam device containing not more than 2% oleoresin capsicum by a person in the protection of a person or property under circumstances which would justify the person's use of physical force. History: Add. 1980, Act 346, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981;-- Am. 1991, Act 33, Imd. Eff. June 10, 1991;-- Am. 1992, Act 4, Imd. Eff. Feb. 21, 1992;-- Am. 2006, Act 401, Eff. Dec. 28, 2006

djm12652

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 2:53 p.m.

I thought possessing Mace by anyone other than law enforcement was still a crime. Has the law changed?

jameslucas

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 : 2:37 p.m.

Having mace in michigan was once a crime.