Talk:Sara Kruzan

This entire article is biased and does not demonstrate a NPOV. Comments such as "abusive pimp," "opted to ignore the extenuating circumstances," etc. all indicate the bias of the article, as do the listed references.

Untitled
It needs significant re-work.

(GregJackP (talk) 20:54, 2 February 2010 (UTC))

Much better. (GregJackP (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC))

Still biased in favor of the killer
Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.14.106 (talk) 04:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

This article is awful.
There's a comment above mentioning that this article needs significant work, but it has been struck-through, as if the changes have been made. Clearly they have not. I stumbled upon this article last night after a friend showed me a video about the subject and I decided to examine the matter in more detail. I was shocked by the quality of the article I found on Wikipedia. I have always had a totally polished and professional experience using Wikipedia as a reference, but the article on Sara Kruzan was like a bad joke. Previous to my edits, the article described itself as "loosely based on a Youtube video". Wikipedia is supposed to be a reputable source of information, not a viral video promotion. For that matter, nothing on Wikipedia should ever be "loosely based" on anything. In the interest of the public, I went through and made a number of superficial changes to the article. Mostly correcting grammar, removing statements without citations, and generally making the article appear as if it wasn't written by a nine-year-old. I have to get back to my job though, and there is still plenty of work to be done to bring this article up to any kind of respectable standard. Many of the links and references are broken or don't contain the information they are alleged to in the citation. Even more facts are presented without citation or reference of any kind. Perhaps this was the information that was "loosely based on the Youtube video". There is also, as a previous comment noted, still a decided bias towards the subject of the article. I tried to smooth it out and make the pro-Kruzan slant less obvious, but there is still a lot of work to do. Obviously, from a personal standpoint, it's impossible not to feel bad for this poor girl, but that doesn't mean that we should condone unsubstantiated facts and a clearly prejudiced stance on the murder and subsequent controversy. 173.66.23.210 (talk) 17:59, 11 July 2012 (UTC) J REX


 * Since this seems like a topic that you have interest for, I encourage you to be bold and help improve it! Wikipedia is free for all to use, so it lives through people like you who see things that need to be fixed, and take it upon themselves to fix them.  Zujua (talk) 06:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

SEPTEMBER, 14TH 1:36am EST — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saylovemusic (talk • contribs) 05:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

PEOPLE KEEP WRITING "ALEGED" PIMP AND "ALEGED" ABUSE, IT IS *ALL* DOCUMENTED AND I HAVE PROVIDED THESE RELIABLE SOURCES I.E. SARA'S COURT DOCUMENTS. I FIND IT TO BE EXTREMELY BIASED TO CLAIM THAT SARA IS A MURDERER ,YET TO STATE THAT THE DOCUMENTED FACTS ARE MERELY "ALEGED", I.E. THAT THERE WAS A HOSTAGE SITUATION AND THAT THE MAN WAS ABOUT TO RAPE HER WHEN SHE SHOT HIM, ETC. THESE FACTS ARE ALL DOCUMENTED IN COURT PAPERS. I REWROTE THE ARTICLE, CITED THESE COURT DOCUMENTS AND EVEN PROVIDED AN EASY LINK TO WHERE I UPLOADED ALL OF HER PDF FILES, SPECIFICALLY FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED TO READ HER FULL COURT DOCUMENTED STORY, FOR THEMSELVES.

I AM NEW TO WIKI AND NOT FAMILIAR WITH HOW TO NAVIGATE HERE OR THE GUIDELINES, YET I'M A PUBLISHED JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR, WHO HAS EXPERIENCE IN EDITING. I KNOW HOW TO PRESENT FACTS, NOT OPINIONS, AND HOW TO CITE RELIABLE SOURCES. UNFORTUNATELY, I'VE BEEN ATTACKED HERE BY OTHERS (WHO REVERT MY ARTICLE BACK TO THE PRIOR, BIASED SUBMISSION) WHO STATE THAT MY "SOURCES ARENT' RELIABLE." I AM CONFIDENT THAT WHOEVER MADE THESE CLAIMS HAS NOT OPENED THE PDF FILE DOCUMENTS THAT I PROVIDED, IN THE REFERENCE AREA, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE MY UPDATE CLEARLY CITES HER STATE DOC.S.

THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT CASE AND IT IS IMPORTANT THAT HER STORY, AS IT IS REVEALED THROUGH HER STATE OF CALIFORNIA COURT DOCUMENTS, IS PROPERLY TOLD AND CITED HERE. THAT WAS MY WHOLE PURPOSE FOR JOINING WIKIPEDIA AND THEN FOR WRITING AND SUBMITTING THIS UPDATE. I WOULD APPRECIATE IF ANYONE WOULD TAKE THE TIME TO ASSIST IN GETTING MY UPDATE ACCEPTED HERE. FOR YOUR OWN INTEREST, YOU CAN OPEN THE PDF FILES VIA THE SARA PAGE AT SAYLOVE MUSIC DOT COM. HERE IS THE UPDATE I WROTE FOR WIKIPEDIA:

Sara Kruzan

Sara Kruzan (d.o.b. January 8, 1978) is a survivor of child molestation, rape, of child-sex trafficking and of intimate battering. March 10, 1994, when child-sex captor G. G. Howard was motioning to rape Sara inside of a hotel room, Sara let off the fatal gunshot that ended her 5-year child sex-captors life. A year later on May 10, 1995, at the age of 17, Sara was convicted of the first degree murder [PC 187] of George Gilbert Howard. Sara was sentenced to life in prison, plus four years, with no possibility of parole. Signed on December 31, 2010, the Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, commuted Sara’s sentence to life with the possibility of parole, come 2020. [1]

Early Life

Sara Kruzan grew up in Riverside, California with an older sister and a single mother on welfare. Sara’s father was an ex-convict and heroine addict. On one of three occasions when Sara met her father, she witnessed him shooting up heroin in a bathroom. Sara’s mother was mentally ill, emotionally unstable and addicted to cocaine. She battered Sara and Sara’s sister physically and psychologically since they were infants. In one of Sara’s earliest memories, her mother smacked her across the face until blood splattered from her nose onto a nearby dresser. Child Protective Services opened an investigation in 1989, due to being notified (by Sara’s school) of bruises on Sara’s body. In 1993, Child Protective Services determined it to be unsafe for Sara to reside with her mother.

Sara was molested by several of the men her mother brought home. Sara’s earliest memory of molestation is cited at age five. As these incidents persisted, Sara’s mother did nothing to stop them, but instead displayed jealousy and blamed Sara. Sara was exposed to her mother’s sex and drug activity. By fourth grade, Sara started cutting. By age 11, Sara began to leave home without permission. Sara’s mother showed no sign of concern. Instead, she physically assaulted Sara and forced her out of her residence. At age 11, Sara was hospitalized for attempted suicide. Rather than to provide Sara with adequate safety, the State sent Sara home. [2]

Child-Sex Trafficking

At age 11, George Gilbert Howard picked up Sara as she was walking home from school. G. G. bribed Sara with ice cream, then took her to his residence, where he undressed her and molested her, thereby committing a first degree felony sexual assault. From that date forward, G. G. Howard indoctrinated Sara into the child-sex trade. At age 12, Sara’s mother set Sara up with a 23 year old “mentor”, who furnished Sara with alcohol and raped her repeatedly over the course of a year. [In the State of California under PC 261.5, sex with a minor is defined as rape.] [3] At age 13, Sara was gang raped by three men. Sara’s mother refused to allow Sara to press charges. She insisted it would backfire and that Sara had “asked for it”.

At age 13, 33 year old George Gilbert Howard raped Sara Kruzan [PC 261.5] then immediately began to sexually exploit Sara, selling her body for three years in the child-sex trade. G. G. Howard threatened Sara and set her in dangerous situations, in addition to the dangers of prostitution. At age 15, Sara was hospitalized when she survived a fatal car crash. Sara was then placed in five or six foster care homes, while she repeatedly ran away to return to G. G. Howard over the course of five months. [4]

Plans to Escape

November of 1993, Sara attempted to escape a life of prostitution by going to Ontario with a 15 year old male friend. Sara’s mother threatened to report kidnap, ergo Sara returned to her mother’s neighborhood. Sara’s friend found a place where the two could temporarily stay with a friend’s uncle, James Earl Hampton. “James Earl” was a convicted felon and drug dealer out on parole. (James E. Hampton, Prisoner ID P23654, has since been convicted of rape and attempted murder, and is serving out a life sentence in the State of California.) [5] As James Earl bragged of the murders he committed, waved guns and threatened to take Sara’s friends life, Sara hoped to borrow money from G. G. to get her own apartment. When James Earl caught wind of this, he demanded Sara follow his instructions to rob and murder G. G. if she wished that she and her loved ones survive.

The Crime Scene

March 9, 1994, James Earl Hampton garnered Sara Kruzan with a pistol and a pager. He ordered Sara to call G. G. Howard to arrange that the two of them meet. James Earl Hampton brought Sara to where G. G. picked her up to take her to a movie theater. Sara began to receive several pages from James Hampton, instructing “187″ (as she knew to be the California Penal Code Section for Murder). G. G. escorted Sara to the same hotel room where he had raped her on prior occasions. While G. G. payed for the room, Sara called James Earl and asked to speak with her friend who was held hostage. James Earl declined to allow it and threatened Sara that she would not survive if she did not follow through with the murder and robbery of G. G. Howard.

Passed midnight, in the hotel room, 36 year old G. G. Howard put on a pornographic movie and began undressing and molesting 16 year old Sara. G. G. took out a large sex toy. Sara dreaded being raped by G. G. Howard. When G. G. turned to plug the sex toy into the wall, Sara shot him. Sara took G. G. Howard’s money and keys, but left behind her purse, identification and shoes. She delivered the car and money to James Earl. James held a gun to Sara’s head and instructed her of what to say if she were questioned. James Earl brought Sara to some other residence where he ordered she be kept locked away in a room. When James Earl brought Sara to his mothers house, she was arrested. Sara initially repeated the story that James Earl demanded, yet she soon confessed to the shooting.

Her Life Sentence

Sara was 16 years old and had no priors. The convicted James Earl Hampton and the minor (then a friend of Sara’s) were never brought to trial. Sara’s defense counsel, David Gunn, advised Sara to take the case to trial. Sara Kruzan was tried in Riverside County Superior Court, with Judge J. Thompson Hanks presiding. The testimony lasted two and a half days. The jurors were not aware that George Gilbert Howard had sexually assaulted, raped and indoctrinated Sara into the child-sex trade for five years. While no expert witnesses spoke in Sara’s defense, Sara agreed to nearly every leading question the prosecutor asked. The probation officer assigned to Sara Kruzan’s case overlooked PC 190.5, that granted court discretion to sentence minors convicted of first degree murder to 25 to life with the possibility of parole. The officer incorrectly stated that State law required the court to sentence Sara to life without possibility of parole. On May 10, 1995, at the age of 17, Sara was sentenced to life in prison, plus four years, without possibility of parole.

Intimate Battering

Two key experts independently concluded that Sara suffered from the effects of intimate partner battering at the time of the shooting and that expert testimony would have affected the outcome of the criminal proceedings. After a thorough evaluation of Sara Kruzan and her documents, Dr. Linda S. Barnard concluded that, “Sara was suffering from the effects of intimate partner battering in March 1994 and her behaviors and actions were affected – if not controlled by – the years of abuse she endured. By failing to have an expert on intimate partner battering and its effects to explain the many complexities involved in this case, Sara Kruzan’s defense was severely limited.” Dr. Nancy Kaser-Boyd concluded, “Ms. Kruzan clearly suffered the common effects of intimate partner battering on the night of the shooting. Most young people [suffering from intimate partner battering and its effects] respond well to therapy and become healthy adults with therapeutic intervention.” [6]

Free Sara Kruzan

Free Sara Kruzan was founded in 2006, by Kim Deanne, whose dedication was inspired by her friend Sara Kruzan to combat her plight as a victim of child-sex slavery and subsequently being sentenced as a youth to life in prison with no possibility of parole. In 2012, Free Sara Kruzan is a National Campaign run by three women (Kim Deanne, Jesaka Sekmet and Carrie Christie), whose mission is to raise awareness of Sara’s story, to facilitate her release from prison and to prevent all forms of child-sex slavery. With the aid of international supporters and Sara’s 2007 interview by Human Rights Watch (see: external links), on the last day of 2010, Sara’s sentence was commuted by Governor Schwarzenegger to 25 to life with the possibility of parole. Sara currently resides in an honors dorm in a women’s facility in the State of California. Sara has earned a college degree and has been named Woman of the Year by Correctional Officers. Sara’s final appeal to be released with time served was dated July 19, 2012, yet granted a 60 day extension. On September 18, 2012 Riverside District Attorney Paul Zellerbach will decide whether Sara will be released with time served. The National Campaign to Free Sara Kruzan is currently petitioning, educating and demonstrating for Sara’s immediate release. [7] [8]

References

(Schwarzenneger, 2010) “Commutation of Sentence”, Executive Department, State of California. (PDF)

(Kruzan, 2010), “APPLICATION FOR CLEMENCY”, Office of the Governor, State of California, State Capitol, Sacramento, California. (PDF)

“CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE”, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.html/pen table of contents.html

(McIntire and Garrison, 2010) “PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, 65495-0001/LEGAL17623043.1″, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. (PDF)

(Lost Angelos Times, 1998) “Ex-Con Guilty of Raping, Stabbing Woman” http://articles.latimes.com/1998/dec/09/local/me-52267

(McIntire and Garrison, 2010) PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO PC 1473.5 AND TO REDRESS SENTENCING ERROR PURSUANT TO PC 190.5 (PDF)

(Sekmet, 2012) “Riverside District Attorney 60 Day Extension — Sara Kruzan”, Free Sara Kruzan.

8. (Sekmet, 2012) “Sara Kruzan’s Story and PDF Files — Truth Be Told”, http://saylovemusic.com/sara

External Links

Human Rights Watch (Video on YouTube)

Free Sara Kruzan — National Organization

VICTORY STREET TEAM FLIER

[End] Thanks and I'll appreciate your help in getting this new article up. I have already been attacked [here] with claims that these sources (court documents and news articles) are not reliable. However, court documents should be considered the most reliable sources to research such a topic. I am a published author, who learned to properly research and cite reliable sources when I wrote my MA thesis. I have researched both sides and aside from court documents, have had conversations with the family members of both Sara Kruzan and the man who she killed. Your help in getting my article approved here (i.e. not reverted back) would be very much appreciated. Thanks! Saylovemusic


 * You've written a novela, not an encyclopedia article. You repeatedly revert the article (edit warring for over a month!), despite the fact that several users have directed you to the information you need to read to learn how to write an article properly. Go through your talk page, read and comprehend the links people have posted for you. All the information is there for you, so get reading. Or not, your choice, but know your edits will be reverted and you will eventually be blocked from editing for being disruptive. Your passion for the subject is blinding you to the nature of Wikipedia.


 * One thing I will touch on is your insistence that the court documents you have cited are proof that you are neutral. They are documents submitted to the court by Sara/her lawyers for consideration for an appeal, and yes, they are biased in her favor. Queerio (talk) 20:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Not horrible, but not good
Editing this article again. Yes, Ms. Kruzan is working on a new defense, but until the time she is successful on that front, what she states in her submissions to the court is alleged information. So little of this article is verifiable information. Most of the citations are dead links, that likely would not have passed for verifiable in the first place. When I have time I'll look for the original court documents and try to work out this mess.

Future editors! Please realize there is room here for both the facts of her conviction (as they stand in official court documentation) and the people who support her re-trial. And that the manner in which these competing arguments are presented here on wikipedia is important! Queerio (talk) 23:11, 30 November 2012 (UTC)