Attorney: 911 abuser has panic disorder
LOS ANGELES — The attorney for a Los Angeles woman who was sentenced to 180 days in jail for calling 911 more than 400 times during the last three years said Tuesday that his client suffers from panic disorder and calls the emergency number “honestly believing she will die.”
In an email, attorney Rachel Rossi said 43-year-old Linette Young never had the intent to annoy or harass law enforcement and did not deliberately lie or report an emergency she knew was false.
“A mentally ill woman will be spending the holidays in jail for being mentally ill,” Rossi said. “The Fire Department was understandably very frustrated, but this was not criminal.”
Young was sentenced to 180 days in jail, three years of probation and mandatory psychological counseling.
Authorities said she would sometimes call 911 as many as six times a day, and from Jan. 1 to Sept. 13, 2013, she called 911 for paramedics 220 times. Each time she was helped by paramedics, they reportedly found no medical issues.
“911 is for emergency calls only, and this conviction is part of our work to ensure that the public's lifeline is not abused,” City Attorney Mike Feuer said in a statement announcing the conviction Monday.
Young was convicted of 12 counts of annoying or harassing 911 calls and 13 counts of making a false emergency report.
Rossi said Young took the stand to try and describe “the sheer fear she experiences during a panic attack.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Who wins, who loses under stricter power plant limits
- Hitchhiking robot’s journey west cut short in Philly
- Obama orders steeper emission cuts from power plants
- West Virginia on pace to issue record number of concealed-carry permits
- Phoenix man accused of beheading wife, dogs jailed on $2M bail
- Finish 44-year Hamtramck housing bias case soon, judge tells lawyers
- Democrats see ‘firewall’ preserving Iran nuclear deal
- CDC: 1 in 5 American adults live with a disability
- Construction of giant bridges sparks curiosity, high demand for public tours
- Veterans notified of info breach in South Dakota
- Food industry players fighting proposed dietary guidelines drop millions on lobbyists