UPDATE: Power Restored to All, Following Murrieta Crash

The crash on Whitewood Road, near Clinton Keith Road, was reported at 12:04 a.m., according to Murrieta police.

Updated at 7:26 p.m.:

Power was restored to all customers in Murrieta, following an outage caused early Sunday when a car damaged a pole in a crash.

The last seven customers had their power restored at 2:04 p.m., according to an SCE spokesperson.

Updated 9:54 a.m.:

Power was restored this morning to all but seven of 529 customers affected when a pole was damaged by an allegedly speeding car, authorities said.

Repairs on the pole were expected to be completed by 4 p.m., according to Southern California Edison spokesperson Caroline Aoyagi.

The boundaries of the outage included Pinyon Street to the south and Menifee Road to the east.


A vehicle slammed into a power pole in Murrieta early Sunday, knocking down live lines and causing injuries to its occupants, police said.

The crash on Clinton Keith Road, near Whitewood Road, was reported at 12:04 a.m., according to a fire captain on scene.

Scanner chatter indicated that the Toyota Avalon's airbags deployed in the crash and there was some blood on the seat and on a door.

Murrieta fire Capt. Forest Hansen told Patch on scene that both driver and passenger -- both men -- were taken to Inland Valley Medical Center with injuries.

Police on scene also indicated that power would be cut to customers in the area while crews worked to effect repairs.

According to Murrieta police Sgt. Daryl Underwood, the driver was speeding east on Clinton Keith and blew through a red light at Whitewood, skidding on a dirt road and slamming into a pole.

"The driver got out and ran, we apprehended him on Whitewood," the sergeant told Patch.

Alcohol was believed to have played a part in the crash, Underwood said.

Clinton Keith Road was shut down at Whitewood and would remain closed for an undetermined amount of time, authorities said.

Diana Serafin October 14, 2012 at 01:53 PM
@censored: How about extending the yellow, making a 4 way red interval and SYNCHRONIZE THE SIGNALS. Hawthorne and Loma Linda did it and reduced all accidents and tickets by over 90%. That's the proff it works. Cameras are about $$$$$ not safety! Why have 50 cities in California gotten rid of them - because it is not about safety only money.
mike smith October 14, 2012 at 01:59 PM
As a U. S. Citicen you have the right to face your accuser in court. The cameras are going to be voted out. Yes on N. Better parenting will reduce teen drinking and driving. Can't see how the lights will impact that at all.
Mary October 14, 2012 at 02:13 PM
Diana before you start making your typical innuendos, take 2 seconds to think about your own question. You, the City (aka taxpayers) and the Registrar of Voters were sued collectively as defendants in the lawsuit. If the appellant has been ordered to pay attorney fees, then the fees are paid across the board to all defendants.
censored messenger October 14, 2012 at 02:21 PM
extending the yellow? that will be an incentive to speed up, c'mon! that cliche about everyone being good parents? yeah, right. let's be realistic about that, LOL!. 4-way red interval (all cars just wait)? many intersections in Murrieta already have that wonderful feature made ONLY for those ignoring a signal change... Cam lights ARE a scam, but only those racing around and daring the yellows should be concerned about that. Sane drivers wont get cam-ticketed.. Stop the aggressive speeding BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY
censored messenger October 14, 2012 at 02:25 PM
agreed the cams will be voted out. The majority of Murrieta drivers will now rely on "better parenting" ?. Sure....murmur a cliche and wait for the next kid T-boned by an SUV...it might be yours, you know?
Cathy Neumann-Bearse October 14, 2012 at 03:29 PM
...just came to me .. even if we extend the yellow .. you know we would still push it. We live in a society where we don't do what is "SAFE" anymore .. we push limits. Your at your job and you want to impress the boss what do you do? play it safe? NO you push it! You really want this job you applied for .. what do you do? Play it safe? NO you push it .. you do all in your power to get where you want to be in life and since Murrieta keeps growing these red light cameras are there just to keep us safe .. all of us .. come on Serafina! How "SAFE" were you putting your signs up ALL over the city without permission? HA!! Point proven .. now lets all be safe out there .. and yet learn to push the limits where we can~! Thank you and now I am stepping off my podium!!
Diana Serafin October 14, 2012 at 04:22 PM
@Cathy - You work on a commission for the city so of course you beleive their stories. Let's deicuss the signs - I parked legally and WALKED to the place I put up signs. Now why is Lane's signs ILLEGALLY placed all over the city? Also another candidate who wants more code enforcement Joel Phillip's signs are ILLEGAL TOO. Both have them on storm drain fences and corners of intersections!!! So you are questioning me but a city council member and a candidate can break codes?????? I though city council people are suppose to set the example and obey the laws!!!!
Diana Serafin October 14, 2012 at 04:24 PM
October 14 at 9:02 am, I just got flashed at Whitewood and MHS by the camera going straight through a green light. I even looked in my rear view mirror and the light was still green!!!! I am curious to see if they send me a GREEN LIGHT TICKET!
mike smith October 14, 2012 at 04:54 PM
@Mess. I'm quite sure you understand the point i was making. For you to make a statement about my child being the next that might get "T Boned" uncalled for don't you think ? Besides we already lost our only child to a drunk 15 years ago in norco.
kristin c October 14, 2012 at 05:24 PM
My brother, an adult alcoholic, plowed through 3 power poles while drunk and lived to tell about it... he also had to pay the electric company 13 k restitution. My mom was and is a good patent and my brother chose the path he has taken. While I agree that parents today fall short in raising their kids to become responsible adults, it is the each persons individual choice to make good or bad decisions. Heck, some people should even have kids but I've seen kids rise out of poor parenting situations and become great people because they choose to be better than the losers that raised them. My brother didn't quit drinking after that and went on to get another dui and he even hit a parked car and fled the scene. He was not prosecuted for that incident.
Diana Serafin October 14, 2012 at 05:38 PM
@Mary - The Court granted Pacific Justice lawyer Pete Lespicopa the permission to get his fees back from the petitioner. The city of Murrieta and the County were also being sued but did not defend the rights of the people to vote on the measure. We citizen defeneded our rights NOT the city or county!!! So will Steve Flynn, the city, the county, ATS or Goldman Sachs pay for the fees? Mary, I have information you don't so please don't assume anything! Beware if someone decides to be the pawn in the next lawsuit - you can be the one responsible for the bill!
Jennifer McCaughey October 14, 2012 at 05:38 PM
If people are going to drive drunk, a camera will not make any difference. Frankly, the bright lights of the camera going off for no reason nearly made me have an accident and I was going through the intersection legally. You are kidding yourself about the value of these cameras unless you are talking about the financial benefit which is why the city is fighting to keep them.
Jennifer McCaughey October 14, 2012 at 06:00 PM
Wow, Cathy I had no idea what a dangerous criminal Diana Serafin is...you really made yourself look like an idiot with that petty little complaint and it's hard to take anyone seriously that has to lower themselves to this level to find fault. Illegal signs are a nuisance, not a safety issue. I am really going to have to pay more attention to who we have serving on these committees after seeing this, your statement is so RIDICULOUS that I am actually embarrassed for you. What disgusts me is that if the cameras are voted out, I expect our city to do what they have already done is the issue of marijuana dispensaries and spend our money and their time doing whatever they can to subvert the wishes of the majority to suit their own agenda in the name of "public safety".
Mary October 14, 2012 at 06:03 PM
Diana, I assumed nothing. Mr. Lespicopa is equal in status with the City and Registrar; they were all defendants in the lawsuit, whether they fought the suit or not If the courts awarded fees TO the pervailing party, aka defendants, then they City nor the Registrar pay, only Flynn. Your statement that probably the voters will pay, is a flat out ridiculous, assumed statement on your part.
Jennifer McCaughey October 14, 2012 at 06:07 PM
This has happened to me countless times as this is right near my home and I have nearly been in an accident twice because the person in front of my stopped when that happened. I avoid this intersection at night because the lights are bright and extremely distracting when they randomly flash their bright lights. Keep up the good work and don't let these people get to you. You do not deserve all the crap you are getting for being the one who stepped forward to catch heat on an issue many people in Murrieta agree with you on.
Cathy Neumann-Bearse October 14, 2012 at 07:23 PM
Diana? One of the signs you put up was on "CITY" property.. another you bullied the man into putting it up .. he doesn't even own the property. As for me being on a "COMMISSION"? I rebuke that statement .. that was not called for .. I am in no ones pocket I am just be .. on a mission to help the people of Murrieta BE SAFE!
Jennifer McCaughey October 14, 2012 at 07:43 PM
Again wth the signs? Are you kidding me right now? She violates sign ordinances and you villify her as a threat to public safety? If that's your best shot, you cannot possibly expect people to take you seriously. I hope you aren't on a city commission because this I would hate to think that we have important issues in the hands of someone who thinks like this.
The Republican October 14, 2012 at 08:00 PM
Cathy and Censored ...I mean Steve Flynn the moron so you really think that having cams up and more monitoring will stop people and teens from drinking and speeding and thus stop accidents that result. Show me the data that teens and drunks will listen or care. It is like passing more gun control laws and hoping that criminals will start obeying the laws and stop acquring weapons. Steve the anti voter moron LOST BIG in court. We know they will try to sue post election that is why there are no NO ON N EFFORTS., We are ready for the ticking moron trust me.
censored messenger October 14, 2012 at 09:28 PM
If the cameras are the wrong answer? so be it, the people will decide. However, the best way to keep Murrieta from turning into Hemet or Moreno Valley is to hammer the scofflaws and make them feel unwelcome, this runs the gamut from speeding on surface streets, ignoring red lights, , with DUI stops, and profiling if necessary..sweep Murrieta of drunks and road ragers.. . This is a bedroom suburb with helmeted toddlers learning to ride bikes,,,If you want to ignore that you can just move to the desert......tear up the streets there..
The Republican October 15, 2012 at 06:29 AM
I have friends in Moreno Valley and Hemet moron and that statement you made makes it seem that kids here have more importance . So then you basically want the law breakers to do it in other areas but not here...nice! I am sure the parents in those areas will love the the way you make other kids in other communities less important. What an idiot Steve Flynn is!
Peter Surowski October 15, 2012 at 06:10 PM
Why didyou change the original headline? I loved it! "Vehicle Versus Pole, Neither Wins." Ha ha ha ha!
Jennifer McCaughey October 15, 2012 at 07:39 PM
So who should they be profiling? Minorities and poor people? I agree that the police need to be vigilent to keep the bad element from flourishing here but profiling is going too far.
Joel Phillips October 16, 2012 at 12:37 AM
We also have to be careful in how we address the problem and given my real estate background, I know of multiple alternatives we can begin to explore to satisfy the needs of both parties while protecting the rights of owners (the most important issue). I will restate my position just in case it was not clear enough the first time. The Constitution makes it very apparent that property rights are inalienable and I will do everything in my power to uphold the Constitution of the United States. If you have other arguments or statements not covered here, I will be happy to address them but I refuse to drop to the level of name calling, spreading rumors or even outright lies although it would be easy to do. To the voters... First, thank you for voting. Ours is a nation of apathy right now because we feel we do not make a difference. Well we do make a difference so get out and vote and make sure your friends get registered by Oct 22nd. They can register right online at  http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vr.htm  Second, do your research. With Google there is no excuse so make sure to fact check and not take everything at face value. This is our future and we control it. Whether you are deciding on propositions or candidates, determine their experience, time in the area, their platform and what they feel is important. If you would like to know more about me, you can find it on my website at http://www.phillipsformurrieta.com. Thank you, Joel Phillips
Joel Phillips October 16, 2012 at 12:38 AM
Furthermore, if we ignore MSHCP we run the risk of losing our ability to issue permits and it will revert to a system that is much slower and will negatively impact development time. Additionally, any development would still be subject to MSHCP and we would lose control over our own city's development with no upside. There is no 'Out Clause'. There is a great deal more to this issue than can be addressed in this reply so let me just state my position on this and let me be VERY CLEAR. I am against Agenda 21 and I am against anything that violates individual property rights, but just because I am against something does not mean I can just step into office, blink my eyes and make it go away. We have to be smart about how we take back our city and our ability to develop and grow as we see fit. There are alternatives that we have to pursue and we may have to think out of the box to deal with this issue. Additionally, the RCA is not without challenges. They are severely underfunded for their mandate and several cities are currently fighting Sustainable Development. We have to review where they are with this fight. (Continued)
Joel Phillips October 16, 2012 at 12:39 AM
The President's Council on Sustainable Development began rolling out 'Smart Growth' based on a UN mandate, not an American philosophy of protecting individual rights. Let's see, where have we heard 'Smart Growth' before? This has filtered down through federal and state agencies to become what we now know in Riverside County as the MSHCP or the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan. The MSHCP is administered through the Western Riverside Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) to protect 146 species and conserve 500,000 acres of which 77% or 347,000 acres are already under conservation. Given that Murrieta is considered a highly sensitive area, it makes us susceptible to conservation. When development plans are submitted for review, it is the RCA who designates how much of which property will be set aside for conservation. Here is the challenge with just saying 'No' to the RCA and the MSHCP as I understand it. Currently in Murrieta, we issue our own development and building permits based on our agreement to abide by county laws and regulations. If we just ignore the MSHCP, it does not change the underlying fact that the RCA has been granted the right to designate areas as sensitive and subject to conservation. (Continued)
Joel Phillips October 16, 2012 at 12:40 AM
Now to the heart of the matter. When you make a statement that I want more laws controlling citizens, I would like to know what you base that on. I will once again be perfectly clear. I am for a small government, less regulation and a more business friendly environment. There is no correlation between more laws and Agenda 21, especially at the local level. That statement does not make any sense. It is a matter of untangling ourselves from existing laws. I will explain this for you momentarily. Quick history on Agenda 21 whose main driver is ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) a United Nations aligned organization. Primary focus on Sustainable Development originally sought cooperation from various countries in building with the future in mind. Original signatory for the US at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 was President George H. W. Bush. At the time it was a set of recommendations. It was not until 1993 when President Bill Clinton signed an Executive Order for the purpose of implementing Agenda 21 in the United States. This is when an environmental agreement became a political agenda and a threat to our inalienable property rights. (Cont)
Joel Phillips October 16, 2012 at 12:41 AM
You will notice that I did not go on the offensive and make malicious comments about you so I will draw the line when you begin to spread rumors about me that have no basis of truth. This is what people in the 'other' party do. Since you obviously do not know where I stand, I will make it abundantly clear so there is no question going forward. By the way, my photo is 4 years old and I have clearly gained weight since then. I think it is from the stress of keeping my business afloat in these economic times but that is just an excuse. You will be happy to know that I have started exercising again to get back in shape so I look more like my picture. I did not do another one because I did not want to waste the time and money taking another professional photo of myself (plus it is motivation for me to start exercising again). Glad we have that cleared up. As for the signs, I have people putting them up but they are instructed not to place them on city property or on highway signs. I have found they are putting them up where other signs already are. So if they are in violation then the city is welcome to take mine down along with any others that might be in violation. I don't really have an issue where you put your signs as long as they are removed after the vote. It is up to enforcement. (Continued)
Joel Phillips October 16, 2012 at 12:42 AM
Diana, normally I don't pay attention to what people say about me. I let my character speak for itself. You can ask anyone who really knows me. I have lived in this area for nearly 12 years. I understand you are upset with me because I did not jump on your bandwagon and agree with you on the traffic cams. I told you I would not decide until I did my research on the subject. Well, you sent me 2,200 pages of documentation, much of it repetitive, and I reviewed them as promised along with other documentation from various sources. Within the documentation you provided was a traffic study done in 2005 specifically on camera regulated sites. Of the 370 camera sites studied over a one-year period it was determined that there was a 24.6 percent decrease in right angle collisions and a 14.6% increase in rear end collisions. Also in that same study that you sent me, there was a report done on injury and physical damage cost in which it was found that rear end collisions did less damage than right angle collisions. BUT, even though I agree with the cameras being in place, the measure is on the ballot and I will listen to my constituents. If they vote to remove the cameras, then I will do my part to remove the cameras. Period. (Cont)
Diana Serafin October 16, 2012 at 12:56 AM
@ Joel I hope you caught the Fox news special on "Substainability. It is not just control growth and water but also the social aspect which is now being taught in colleges. It is a control of everyone's life. It involves the educational system, the energy market, the transportation system, the governmental system, the health care system, food production, and more. The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms, and take away your voice.
Diana Serafin October 16, 2012 at 01:03 AM
I was walking door to door about 9 am by a park near Temple street today and ran i ran into a gentlman who was for the cameras because "the cameras catch lawbreakers". The man was leaving his property to take his two dogs UNLEASHED to the park to play. As I came back I realized the signed stated Dogs must be on a leash. So I went to the gentlman and asked him why he was breaking the law with his dogs running loose. And I noticed he did not have any bag to pick up the dogs piles. Breaking another law. I think the city needs to send someone to the park and issue some tickets!!!!!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »