Elizabeth Smart captor Wanda Barzee is sentenced to 15 years in prison

Wanda Eileen Barzee, the woman who helped her husband keep kidnap victim Elizabeth Smart captive for nine months in 2002, was sentenced today to 15 years in federal prison for the abduction.

In a Salt Lake City federal court, Barzee pleaded guilty to charges of kidnapping and unlawful transportation of a minor across state lines, said a Times article by Nicholas Riccardi today. She and authorities agreed upon the 15-year sentence provided she testifies against her husband, Brian David Mitchell.

Mitchell kidnapped Smart from her bedroom in Salt Lake City in March 2002 and brought her to a remote camp where Barzee helped him keep her chained up. She was found by a motorist in 2003.

U.S. Atty. Brett Tolman said the agreement means that Smart will not have to testify against  Barzee. Smart was not in the courtroom today.

Federal prosecutors hope to prove at a hearing on Nov. 30 that Mitchell can face charges in federal court after he was found mentally incompetent for state court charges.

What do you think about Barzee’s sentence? Were the charges of kidnapping and unlawful transportation of a minor appropriate? Do you feel the length of the sentence (15 years) is a proper application of justice? Will this, as the U.S. attorney said today, begin the process of "bring[ing] long-awaited closure to Smart and her family"?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: Elizabeth Smart kidnapper Wanda Barzee following a hearing in federal court Tuesday in Salt Lake City. Credit: Colin E. Braley / AP

Beltway sniper John Allen Muhammad to be executed in Virginia [Updated]

Beltway sniper John Allen Muhammad is scheduled to be executed this evening in Virginia.

[Updated Wednesday: Muhammad's execution was carried out Tuesday night.]

According to the article by Times reporter David G. Savage, Muhammad was convicted in 2003 of the shooting rampage that occurred the year before. Of the 16 people shot, 10 died.

U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft made the choice seven years ago to send Muhammad, then 41, and his teenage accomplice, Lee Boyd Malvo, to Virginia to be tried despite the fact that more of the mayhem took place in Maryland.

In 2002, Maryland had put the death penalty on hold because of racial unfairness. So while only three of the killings took place in Virginia, a death sentence was a possibility in that state. Thus Ashcroft chose Virginia to hold the trial.

Malvo was convicted of the murders, but because of his young age, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

The prosecution and families of the victims have said they are comforted by the sentence. The Supreme Court justices turned down a final emergency appeal from Muhammad's lawyers that he needed more time to develop his appeals since the process has taken place at a rapid pace.

So the question is, is this execution happening too quickly? Was it right that Muhammad was tried in Virginia instead of Maryland? Or do you agree with the speedy execution?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: John Allen Muhammad listens to the jury's recommendation of death in Virginia Beach Circuit Court on November 24, 2003. Credit: Getty Images

12 killed in shooting at Ft. Hood Army base in Texas

A shooting at Ft. Hood Army base in Texas this afternoon has left at least 12 people dead and 31 wounded.  ABC News identified the shooter as Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan. [Update: A previous version of this post stated that there were other shooters.]

Army deputy chief of staff Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli has been at the head of the efforts to reduce the number of Army suicides, which hit a three-decade high in 2008. [Update, 5:01 p.m.: A previous version of this post said Gen. Chiarelli was headed to Ft. Hood today. The Army tells us he is not.]

News organizations are offering updates as quickly as they can. Twitter users are also expressing their concern and speculation on the social network, using the hashtags “#fthood” and “#forthood.” Topping the trending topics, which show the most popular topics at any given time, are “Fort Hood,” “Texas” and “Major Malik Nadal.”

Here are some of the tweets about the shootings:

Lizzs_Lockeroom: Why does it always take a tragedy to bring attention to a long standing problem on soldiers mental health...

TormentedOne: They give us: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage.

Swineheart: A guy would have to "have his head on straight" to get to Major. Seems more likely an ideological issue.

How did you react to news of the shooting?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo credit: Reuters

Should David Letterman be fired for having affairs with members of his staff?

Unless you were on a very long vacation to an amazingly unplugged island or taking a terrific nap, you've heard that David Letterman has admitted to having affairs with women on his staff. The revelations were made public this week after Letterman testified before a grand jury that he was blackmailed by the former boyfriend of one of his lovers. That man, Robert Joel Halderman, was arrested for extortion. He once dated former "Late Show" staffer and Letterman assistant Stephanie Birkitt.

As the news broke last night, articles were written all over the Web, including here at the Times, where reader reaction was mixed. Some felt Letterman did the right thing by admitting his wrongdoing, others felt he should be fired immediately.

Bunny wrote: "Usually not a good idea to have sex with your employees. It is a far worse thing to try to extort someone for $2 million."

bil bornstein added: "Misogynist creep...."

daryl responded to Letterman's claims that he felt "menaced" by the alleged extortion thusly: "Like we care about how embarrassed or threatened you feel, you ethical midget. Think how those women felt, having to put up with your creepy advances to keep their jobs."

Jack went even further: "After firing Dan Rather, it would be hypocritical for CBS not to fire Dave Letterman. Letterman's indiscretions were grossly irresponsible. compromising not only himself, but also CBS and most of all the women who were involved. For a comedian who made a living out of lampooning other public figures who engaged in sexual escapades, he is now crippled, living in a glass house. He doesn't dare joke anymore about Bill Clinton, Mark Foley, Gov. Sanford, etc. or any of their kind without being hypocritical. I will miss him but he has got to go."

More reactions after the jump...

Lopez says Polanski defenders lose sight of true victim

Columnist Steve Lopez reads through old grand jury transcripts in which a girl who was 13 in 1977 describes her encounter with Roman Polanski. Lopez says the director's defenders have lost sight of the true victim in the case. 

To hear these people tell it, you'd think Polanski was the victim rather than the teenager.

And then there's Woody Allen, who has signed the petition too.

Woody Allen?

You'd think that after marrying his longtime girlfriend's adopted daughter, he'd have the good sense to remain silent. But at least Soon-Yi Previn was a consenting adult.

I'd like to show all these great luminaries the testimony from Polanski's underage victim, as well as Polanski's admission of guilt. Then I'd like to ask whether, if the victim were their daughter, they'd be so cavalier about a crime that was originally charged as sodomy and rape before Polanski agreed to a plea bargain. Would they still support Polanski's wish to remain on the lam living the life of a king, despite the fact that he skipped the U.S. in 1977 before he was sentenced?

Lopez hopes Polanski loses his extradition fight, gets hustled back to California and finally gets a sentence that fits his crime.

What do you think? You can voice your opinion here.

In this Nov. 21, 2008 file photo, Director Roman Polansky. center, waves at the screening of Director Oliver Stone's film "W." at the XXVI Turin Film Festival in Turin, Italy. Polanski was arrested by Swiss police as he flew in for the Zurich Film Festival and faces possible extradition to the United States for having sex in 1977 with a 13-year-old girl, authorities said Sunday, Sept. 27, 2009. Polanski was scheduled to receive an honorary award at the festival when he was apprehended Saturday at the airport, the Swiss Justice Ministry said in a statement. It said U.S. authorities have sought the arrest of the 76-year-old director around the world since 2005. (AP Photo/Massimo Pinca, File)

Should image influence a jury's decision?

They say that Lady Justice is blind.  But in Los Angeles, Lady Justice also has a keen sense of fashion.

Richard Rodriguez, the gang member who was kicked in the head by an El Monte police officer after a televised car chase, has filed a $5-million legal claim against the city.  But before he appears in court, he'll possibly be undergoing a serious makeover. 

Rodriguez's attorney, Nick Pacheco, has suggested that his client ditch his thuggish look (seen in his mug shot on the left), in favor of a more conservative -- albeit less eye-catching -- visage (seen in the photoshopped version on the right).

In the booking photo, Rodriguez's head is shaved, and the name of his gang hangs over his lip. Tattoos climb his neck. In the "after" rendition, he's wearing a black suit with a metallic gray tie, neatly combed hair and a lush mustache.

Pacheco hopes Rodriguez's makeover will allow the jury to be sympathetic to Rodriguez, who claims to suffer headaches and blurred vision as a result of his arrest.

"People get past looks when you put on a suit and your hair is grown," said Pacheco.

What do you think of Pacheco's strategy?  What does it say about our justice system when a plaintiff feels he or she must disguise certain physical features in order to receive a fair trial?

-- Brendan Bigelow

Photo: Richard Rodriguez, who was kicked in the head by an El Monte police officer, has been advised to cover his tattoos and grow hair to look like the Photoshop image at right. Credit: Law Offices of Nick Pacheco

Arrest of Harvard scholar sparks racism debate

On Thursday, Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr., author of "Colored People: A Memoir" and "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Black Man," was arrested at his home on charges of disorderly conduct.  The arrest took place after officers responded to a call about a possible burglary at Gates' residence:

Cambridge police say they responded to the well-maintained two-story home after a woman reported seeing "two black males with backpacks on the porch," with one "wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry."

By the time police arrived, Gates -- the 58-year-old director of Harvard's W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research and one of the "two black males" -- was inside the house, which he leases from Harvard. He'd just returned from a trip to China, had found the front door jammed and entered through the rear. The police report says that he initially declined to come outside and show an officer his identification, allegedly saying, "Why, because I'm a black man in America?"

Although Cambridge police have since dropped the charges against Gates -- describing the arrest as "regrettable and unfortunate" -- it hasn't quelled the fiery racial debate among readers:

"This man propogates racism. He is the one that made race an issue. The police received a call where someone believed there was a break in in progress. the police respond and ask the person inside the house that they suspect was broken into, for identification. Rather then show them his ID, he yells at them and throws race in their face. All the situation called for was for him to identify himself as the owner, and what he SHOULD have done is thanked the officers for their timely response and thorough investigation. I applaude the police for arresting him. they should arrest more poeple (black, white, asian, hispanic, etc...) who don't cooporate with law enforcement," wrote Mike.

Arrest of anti-gang leader Alex Sanchez sparks criticism of gang outreach programs

Former MS-13 gang member and anti-gang crusader Alex Sanchez was taken into custody today as a part of a federal indictment of several MS-13 gang members. Sanchez, along with the other suspects named in the indictment, is accused by the FBI of being involved in multiple slayings, extortion and assaults in the Lafayette Park area.

During his youth, Sanchez was an active member of MS-13. After violating parole in 1994, Sanchez was deported to his home country of El Salvador. He returned to the United States a year later and formally renounced his affiliations with MS-13. He would go on to help organize the local chapter of Homies Unidos, an nonprofit organization dedicated to gang violence prevention.

Sanchez gained notoriety a few years ago when authorities attempted to deport him a second time.  Several notable figures came to Sanchez's aid, including former state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles), who testified in his defense. He was eventually granted political asylum after it was found that he had been harassed by the LAPD.

The original L.A. Now article on the arrest has spurred a significant amount of debate. Many readers contended that Sanchez should not have been granted political asylum, and they were critical of gang outreach programs.

"Ho hum. The only ones shocked are those that haven't been reading the paper for YEARS. It's old news that the government is paying "former" gang members to do "outreach." Yes, your tax dollars are funding gang crime and killings. Disgusting and stupid, but no one really cares," wrote windu.

"Silly to think that he actually left MS-13! Silly court to have overturned the deportation and let him stay in the country AFTER he had re-entered illegally! Silly Tom Hayden! Why must we spend tax dollars prosecuting and incarcerating these vicious criminals? I say send them back to their country of origin to rot in their jails! Enough of this!!!! And this is coming from a self-described latino lefty liberal! I am so tired of politicians in general and Latino politicians in particular who don't have the guts to say no to illegal immigration, no to gangs, no to lawlessness because they fear losing face with their latino constituents," said Frankie.

(Read more after the jump)

Has justice been served in the Chris Brown case?

L.A. Now reports that prosecutors have made a plea agreement with R&B singer Chris Brown, who faced a five-year sentence after being accused of assaulting Rihanna shortly before the 2009 Grammy Awards. 

Although he has not been formally sentenced, Brown now faces six months of community labor and five years' probation as a part of the deal. He will also be ordered to take a year-long domestic violence prevention class. Judge Patricia Schnegg added that she would be issuing a stay-away order, which would prevent Brown from making contact with Rihanna.

The case began in February, when Brown was arrested after he allegedly beat and threatened Rihanna while driving home from a pre-Grammy party. Since his arrest, Brown's case has received unprecedented media attention.  More than 50 media outlets had asked to attend today's proceedings. 

Now that the case has come to a close, we want to hear from you. What do you think of the plea agreement? Was justice served or did Chris Brown get off easy?

-- Brendan Bigelow

Photo: Chris Brown is confronted in court with assault charges. Credit: Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times

Traffic sting in South Pasadena angers residents

On Wednesday, the South Pasadena Police Department issued more than 160 traffic citations as a part of a sting designed to catch motorists who failed to stop for a school bus with flashing red lights.  

The program has drawn criticism from local residents, who say the operation was unfair and poorly coordinated.  Many complained that the bus -- which was parked on a six-lane road -- was not in an area where school buses usually operate.  The lack of any schoolchildren and the distraction caused by the sting were also among residents' complaints.  

One of the drivers caught in the sting commented on the original article in L.A. Now.

"I am one of those who was given a ticket that day and the execution of the sting was so unfair knowing the fact that the school clearly is on summer break. I drive 35 mph in 40 mph zone on Huntington Dr. every day. I never saw a school bus, it's rush hour traffic on a busy thoroughfare and 12 or so police vehicles came out of Milan Avenue swooping in causing total chaos. I agree that it was a crazy thing to park that "decoy school bus" near the intersection of Milan Avenue, which has no stop sign or crosswalk, besides I did not see anybody speeding, I did not see any schoolchildren and lastly I didn’t see the flashing red light signal nor stop signal arm. It was a circus of lights and chaos and I honestly was scared and thought there was a police pursuit or something, I mean people were literally just trying to figure out what was going on and what to do to keep away from whatever the activity was. I thought I was being directed along with other motorists away from whatever it was that was happening. It was a crazy and dangerous action from the police departments involved to expect us to stop in the middle of a very busy street especially when they swarmed in to protect and serve," wrote Amy.

Other readers complained that the sting was a thinly veiled attempt to collect revenue for the city. 

Proposed $2-million Lakers parade draws controversy

Sunday night's Lakers victory was well received in a city that hasn't had much to celebrate as of late.  Even though Game 5 was held in Orlando, millions of Lakers fans gathered at homes and bars to watch the game unfold on television. After the buzzer sounded, crowds poured into the streets as Lakers fans from across Los Angeles came together in a grand display of pride and unity that quickly devolved into destructive rioting.

After setting a few police cars on fire and doing a bit of looting, the crowds dispersed and the revelers went home.     

The rioting, which caused significant monetary damage, has had quite an effect on the growing debate over Wednesday's proposed $2-million Laker parade. Many feel that the parade -- for which the city would pay half -- is inappropriate at a time when the city is struggling to resolve severe budget shortfalls.  Sunday night's rioting only added to the list of concerns held by many Los Angeles residents. 

"The Lakes deserve every recognition winning the championship. However, in these difficult times for the city and Laker fans, a parade/rally is insensitive and hurtful; I'll send the organization an e-card instead. If the city can afford a parade, the taxpayers of Los Angeles are then obviously being lied to by civic leaders regarding a fiscal crisis," said ELizabeth.

"Does that fee include the cost to clean up after all these hoodlums who have already rioted and caused damage throughout the city, including injuries to eight police officers? Huge huge HUGE waste of money," added MB.

More after the jump...

Bummer, dude: Readers disagree with charges against pot dispensary operator

During his trial, Charles Lynch came to represent the growing discrepancies between state and federal drug enforcement policies. On Thursday, he was sentenced to a year and a day in prison.

Lynch, who operated a medical marijuana dispensary in Morro Bay, was convicted last summer of cultivating and distributing marijuana, despite being sanctioned by his town's mayor.  Lynch's attorneys struggled to defend him, in part because of a Supreme Court ruling that bars medical necessity from being used as a defense against federal drug charges. 

During sentencing, U.S. District Judge George H. Wu expressed his sympathy toward  Lynch, noting that he had little choice but to impose the minimum sentence.

Although the trial has come to a close, the debate over California's medical marijuana laws is still ongoing.  Most L.A. Now readers expressed outrage over the sentencing, arguing that prosecuting owners of pot dispensaries is a waste of government resources.

"Your tax dollars at hard work while CA goes broke. I'm glad that real crime (murder, gang warface, rape, child molestation, embezzlement, the financial sector, etc...) has been resolved so that we can waste time and tax money investigating and prosecuting somebody for growing a plant... Every one of you deserves a hearty pat on the back for putting such a dangerous and vile monster behind bars," mslade wrote.

(Read more comments after the jump)

Readers critical of LAPD detective who is charged with murder

On Monday, prosecutors announced that they had filed murder charges against LAPD detective Stephanie Lazarus in connection with a decades-old murder case. Prosecutors allege that the killing was a result of a love triangle involving Sherri Rae Rasmussen and her husband, who had previously dated Lazarus. Despite reports that Lazarus had threatened Rasmussen before her death, police did not consider Lazarus a serious suspect at the time. For decades, the case remained unsolved.

However, newly analyzed DNA evidence points to a female killer, which exonerates several previous suspects. Police have now refocused their efforts on Lazarus, whose DNA matches the DNA found at the crime scene.

The LAPD's decision not to investigate Lazarus at the time of the killing has sparked a lot of controversy among readers. Many believe that Lazarus' status as an LAPD detective may have exempted her from being considered a suspect.    

"The only difference between cops and criminals is that the cops work for us. Whether a cop is ever investigated for a crime depends more what is happening behind the scenes than whether 'justice' is served," wrote anotherwhiner.

"Wow. LAPD Detective Lazarus got away with murder for 23 years? Nice work, LAPD. Good hire. Nice retention. Excellent promotion (from patrol officer to detective). And, oh by the way, great cover up," said Larry Anaheim.

(Read more comments after the jump.)

Three-strikes offenders get a second chance, but should they?

Norman Williams is one of a small number of inmates -- given 25-years-to-life sentences for relatively minor offenses as a result of California's three-strikes law -- to be released from prison as a result of the work of Stanford law students.

The students say cases such as Williams' illustrate the flaws in the three-strikes law, under which nonviolent offenses like petty theft and drug possession can be considered strikes.  "It's an awful situation that I don't think that the voters envisioned," recent Stanford law graduate Jennifer Robinson told The Times' Jack Leonard, whose "Law students help free three-strikes offenders" was a front-page story in today's paper.

The students argued that the nonviolent nature of Williams' crimes (two residential burglaries and, his final strike, stealing a car jack and tools from a tow truck) -- coupled with his dismal upbringing, history of drug addiction (he kicked his crack cocaine habit in prison), and low IQ -- rendered his life sentence a cruelly harsh punishment.  He'd already served 13 years of the sentence, and a condition of his release meant he'd live in homeless shelters and complete job training. 

Three-strikes advocates like Mike Reynolds (who authored the law after his daughter's murder) call the students' work misguided.  Many of the offenders given life sentences as a result of a nonviolent third strike have long and violent records, Reynolds says, and the law puts away the very people voters intended to remove from the general population.  "Do they understand that they could be turning someone loose who could get out and hurt somebody?" he asked.

What do you think -- is it a miscarriage of justice to sentence someone with Williams' nonviolent record to a life term?  Do you think the three-strikes law is in need of reform, or does it already operate the way it should?  Share your thoughts here.

Photo: Williams with Michael S. Romano, supervising attorney for the Mills Legal Clinic at Stanford Law School. Credit: Robert Durell / For The Times

Does the threat of violence stop you from going to Dodger Stadium?

L.A. Times reporter Andrew Blankstein reported last month that a man was stabbed multiple times during the Dodgers home opener against the San Francisco Giants. Blankstein followed up today with a report that a suspect has been arrested in connection with the assault.

This is not the first time that violence has been committed at the stadium. Back in 2003, a West Covina man leaving the stadium got into an argument with a group of men, which resulted in his death by shooting.

Right after the recent stabbing, our readers expressed concern about attending Dodgers games at Chavez Ravine.

"I have to say, the games have gotten worse. All these people do is ruin it for the true fans. We go and spend good money and the last thing that I want is: having to worry about my kids having things thrown at them. I had to tell my 4 year old, that the fool next to me was yelling, “dirty socks”, rather then “Giant Suck”. There needs to be a no tolerance rule with all of this fools who think, getting drunk and going to a public place is cool." - Rafa 

Dodger Stadium can bring chaotic fans, but that can happen anywhere in LA. People get unruly and they fight. Only COWARDS pull out knives and guns. What happened to fighting one on one and whoever wins, wins! That's it.  - Gina

Time to bring back those middle aged ushers with straw hats to kick butt and take names. - dodger tony

On the other hand....