A 2-month-old baby boy is recovering from head surgery after being injured while his parents fought.
The baby’s 23-year-old father was arrested at the home and charged with abduction, felonious assault and domestic violence. Police also are investigating whether the man, Victor Cabrera-Zamora, a 23-year-old Hispanic, is in the country illegally.
A woman called to 270 Vinewood Ave. at 8:54 p.m. on Nov. 28. She was unable to speak to the dispatcher but according to police reports, “it was obvious there was a disturbance going on at the residence.”
As police arrived on the scene, the dispatcher was able to determine a child was possibly injured and bleeding.
Avon Lake Lt. Duane Streator said when police arrived, the baby’s parents were at the front door, agitated and emotional. Cabrera-Zamora was detained and officers found the baby’s mother holding a 2-month old baby boy who was bleeding from the head.
According to police, Cabrera-Zamora came to the house to visit the baby and retrieve a document from the baby’s mother. Cabrera-Zamora was holding the baby and told her he was going to take the baby.
The 27-year-old mother, who has custody of the child, told the father he could not take the baby. Police said the father's response was to assault the mother while he was holding the baby.
“During the physical altercation the father was attempting to leave the house down some stairs and fell against a piano while holding the baby,” Streator said. The baby struck its head on the piano causing the head injury.
The baby and mother were taken to Fairview Hospital for treatment of their injuries. The baby was transferred to Rainbow Children’s Hospital for further treatment of his injuries.
“The baby is still in hospital,” Streator said. “He had surgery yesterday at Rainbow and is recuperating.”
Cabrera-Zamora was arrested without incident. Streator said at that time police learned he had a weapon in the car that he drove to the Vinewood address. Police found a loaded AK-47 assault rifle in the car.
Cabrera-Zamora was also charged with improperly handling of firearms in a vehicle. He was arraigned on the charges in and is being held without bond. Court records list a Lakewood, WA address, but Streator said they could not determin what his address is.
"He gave a few addresses, including a Lorain address, Streator said.
Streator said if Cabrera-Zamora is in the country illegally, he will first have to answer to the criminal charges before the issue is reviewed by Immigration and Naturalization Services.
It has no bearing on his guilt in this manner, simply that I think if this was a blond guy, with a polish sounding last name, who gave an address in Lorain, the article would not lead and close with a reference to investigation of his legal status. Ask yourself if the article would be written differently if it was a white guy....would the focus of the police and city be on immigration status? Or the crime that occured?
I am not being "PC" but why mention in the article that he was "Hispanic" ? My point is that his ethnicity, skin color, or language has no bearing on his guilt, it has no relevance. Neither does his immigration status. I am not being PC, I think it is disgusting what this man did. Also please understand I am not defending this individual. My point is that his ethnicity shouldn't have any relevance to this particular incident. Can you really say that if this was a white guy the article would have opened with a description of his ethnicity? Does anyone's ethnicity ever have a bearing on their likelihood of guilt?
There seemed to be so many reasons to assume this guy was a criminal, the AK47 being the least of these, we should judge his guilt based on his actions. Last name, skin color, accent, preferred language, country of origin, religion, etc. have no bearing on someones guilt. That isn't "PC" that is the law. If this article was written in 1938 Germany and all the references to him being "Hispanic" were replaced with "JEW" or if the article read "Once we determine whether or not he is a Gypsy we will know what to do with him" I enjoy the discussion about this.
Second, the reason the nationality was mentioned was because the police are going to see if any citizenship issues are relevant. Without mentioning that he was Hispanic, the reader wouldn't understand why the police were checking into this point. The legality of this person IS a police issue and they would be not doing their job if they didn't check out his background-regardless of race. As for discussing this further-go ahead. I might suggest using your time in a better manner-donate some time to a battered womens shelter, raise some money to benefit that liitle baby so he can live a better life(if he lives), or maybe just get down on your knees and be thankful that you are not in their shoes and that nobody else got hurt or killed before the police were able to get him in custody.
My comments are in no way defending this individual, ignoring the fact that I have stated that repeatedly, and attacking me as defending this dude, is completely ignoring my statements. My comments are regarding the fact that if this individual appeared Eastern European, gave multiple addresses including one in Lorain, and spoke broken English (which was an assumption by another reader btw) the article would read very differently. From a social perspective (not a law enforcement perspective) What does it say about our culture if we accept that white people are written about in a different way than brown people? I find it interesting that none of the responses to my comments have actually addressed that issue. Attacking me personally, accusing me of not caring about the victims (child and mother), or of making the perp a victim instead of actually discussing the issue I raised leads me to believe the emotion fueling these responses is in part influenced by the increasing xenophobia in this area. Seriously, telling me my time would be better used volunteering at a shelter doesn't make me wrong, it means you prefer to attack me, not respond to my comments.
The information about the police investigating whether he was here in the country illegally would have been just as apparent if it read like this: The baby’s 23-year-old father was arrested at the home and charged with abduction, felonious assault and domestic violence. Police also are investigating whether the man, Victor Cabrera-Zamora, a 23-year-old, is in the country illegally. Can anyone disagree with that point specifically? Without a personal attack or accusing me of not caring about the child please?
.http://2presspapers.northcoastnow.com/man-arrested-after-attempt-to-abduct-his-son/ That article contains the one piece of information not included in this article, which would have prevented speculation about why police where investigating his immigration status. Because *He told them he was here illegally*! NOT because of his ethnicity, last name, first language, or skin color. That is the point I was trying to make. The Press article manages to relay *more* information about the incident, while leaving his ethnicity completely out of the article. It's not being "PC" or making him a victim, or ignoring the real victims, rather it is good journalism that gives the facts, without unnecessary commentary on his ethnicity, or speculation on why his immigration status is under investigation. The latter is an opinion piece, and that is part of what bothered me originally. Kudos to the author of the press article for sticking to the facts, and leaving the hints and allusions about his ethnicity out of it. I am normally a big fan of the AL Patch, but this one missed the mark.
Just to clear things up, I never assumed he had broken english I was just stating the police must have had their reasons to think that he might be in the country illegally which is also crime along with the weapon charge and the assault etc.
My profession has no bearing on my ability to point out ethnic bias in a news article, asking about my profession is an attempt to discredit me or the validity of my opinion, yet still not a response to my comment on how the article was written. Let me again state, my critique is not one of the police, but of the ethnic bias contained in this article. I find it interesting from a sociological perspective. Feel free to respond to the questions and concerns I was raising directly.
I'm not sure why no one except Sarah seems to understand I have been referring to and commenting on the content of the *article* not the conduct of the police, or the guilt of the suspect. Why is that so difficult to understand? I do credit the police for keeping me safe by getting this guy. Yet their conduct, and his guilt or innocence, have no relationship to the fact that the article mentions that he is "Hispanic" when it was not relevant to the article or the incident. that isn't an insane argument about being *PC*, but a serious critique of the ethnic bias of this article.
My degree is in Social Work and Sociology, so I am more likely to pick out and notice what I consider an ethnically biased piece, than I am to read it and not notice. But choosing to comment on that from a social perspective, doesn't mean I have no other feelings or reactions to the entire situation. Emotionally the event or altercation makes me literally sick to my stomach. I would love to personally visit him in the dead of night to avenge the people he victimized. But that is my personal reaction to what this guy did, the comments I made are a social critique of the article as it was written. Am I making sense as I try to explain how I am differentiating the two?
Hey Ericka, guess what. the cops were called there on a domestic violence complaint. From all indications "Cabrera-Zamora", or whatever other ten names he used, was the perp and a child was injured. They have every right to ask for identification on this scumbag. Hey Ericka, every heard of "search incident to arrest"? They also had a right to search the car for officer safety also. Many departments also have vehicle inventory policies when they tow a vehicle, did this though ever cross your mind?? You probably blamed the cops for those nine illegals who were working at Las Cuelas also now didn't you? My hat goes off to the Avon Lake Police on a job well done, hopefully they already turned this illegal, along with any others left around here, over to the border patrol.
Please read my above posts to see where I have repeatedly stated I don't question the actions taken by the police, and in fact expressed appreciation. I am saddened that only one comment out of all these I see at this time actually addresses the point I made about the article. Please see the other article I linked to as an example of an article covering the same incident, without mentioning the perp's ethnicity. If I was a "bleeding heart liberal" defending this idiot, I wouldn't feel that the other article is less biased and therefore more accurate. Perhaps I am in error wanting to have a rational discussion about the article. It seems everyone is content to illustrate the effects of journalistic bias by having an emotionally based anger fest directed at Latins, or anyone who dares to consider the article intellectually. My mistake....
The Patch article, in contrast to the Press article, alluded to some type of suspicion about his legal status. The second sentence in the article conveys 2 pieces of information: 1. The suspect is "Hispanic" 2. Police are investigating his legal status. In my opinion this first piece of information is irrelevant to the story, it provides no additional factual information aside from the ethnicity of the man. A point I was trying to illustrate is that if this exact same event occurred, but the man was blond with a Polish or other European name, the article would not include a reference to the perp's ethnicity. After reading the Press article and finding out that the man actually told police he was here illegally, I completely understand why the Police are investigating his legal status, and I commend them for doing so. Yet I still can't help but see in this article what appear to be unnecessary references to his ethnicity, while leaving out the fact that this man disclosed to the police that he was here illegally. I can't think of any reason to include his ethnicity in the article, it serves no purpose that I can see. Why reference the investigation of his legal status, yet not disclose the fact that he specifically told the police he was here illegally? I
I understand why someone might not notice little things like the word "Hispanic" being used this way, or the writing of the article in a way that apparently inspires a lot of emotional reaction and xenophobia about Latin Americans. Unfortunately, little things like an omitting his statement about being here illegally, and including the loaded term "Hispanic" as if it has relevance to his actions, contribute to an overall social and cultural attitude that accepts treating one ethnic group differently than another.