Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:03AM – #2

how does this go unnoticed until 10am???

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:33AM – #3

This story is bizarre. Why would another store owner risk her livelihood like this? Was there a feud going on? This is sad. I like Weeneez, and love their inexpensive but great breakfasts. I remember Rico once mention an employee of hers who had stolen all her hamburger meat from their fridge, but she decided to not fire him and give him another chance. Maybe she is just a victim of circumstance and too forgiving to a fault?

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:08AM – #6

Pirot where are you? Pirot!

Howie on the Hill

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 10:51AM – #8

This wouldn't be the first beef from Julie towards the Must. She also has all utilities in her name- there were situations early on where the Must would pay their bills to Julie but Julie would not pay the utilities and they were consequently shut off, disrupting business.

I know the owners of the Must, they are wonderful people who have plans to do more in the area. They are incredibly accomidating and super friendly. This is in stark contrast to Julie Rico, who I have witnessed stir up trouble time and again.... I was at a dlanc meeting where she single handedly tried to start trouble with the incredible Russell Brown over the ArtWalk..... her words that night led me to believe that she is not happy at all about the changes happening downtown and may either be jealous of the successes of the new businesses downtown or one of the old gaurd who just doesn't like to see change.

The woman owns a corner shop that is barely open on a regular basis.... she has questionable taste in art and has a history of causing problems. If Bert Green is willing to stick his neck out and call it like it is, then we should be believing.... Bert is a man who chooses his words very carefully. It is truly sad that this is happinging to a business like theirs that has really elevated our neighborhood and really added so much life and character.

If all the speculation is true, I hope this allows the Must and possibly Security Lofts Building (who Julie rents from) to finally get rid of her once and for all so someone can turn that space into something that adds to the neighborhood, not detracts from it. Can you imagine how much money the Must is losing by not being open this weekend?? Jail is not enough for the person responsible for this, I hope they are sued within an inch of their life!!

GO MUST!! The Historic Core Loves You!!!!!!! Stay strong!!!

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 10:56AM – #9

I have noticed that a number of people seem to have first hand information regarding this event and may be called upon, I am sure, to give a statement or possibly testify in a potential civil or crimminal case re: this matter... Such as Bert Green, Pet Project, Ms Ginny Case and others in the community that have retweeted alledge "information" regarding the case. Those that have retweeted without first hand knowledge of the case should wait for a Police statement of "facts". There is a lot to this as Jim Weinstead mentioned in his Tweeter Account. A Sad situation whatever it may be. There are a lot of unanswered questions. A "rush to judgement" is uncalled for until there are actual facts as found by the DAs office.

Howie on the Hil

<

Howie on the Hill

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 11:13AM – #10

There has got to be more to the story to this than we know. I cannot imagine that a person that close to a situation would put themselves in that position to inevitably get caught. There could be unpaid rent, utilities, breach of terms on their contract, atleast something to make someone do something where they would easily get caught.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 11:21AM – #11

unpaid rent??? are you kidding? The Must is always busy..... they probably make the rent on ArtWalk night alone...... think about it, what could ANYBODY have done to warrent someone coming into your business and stealing furniture and your wine inventory?? if you live in downtown, you have to have seen crazies first hand. why can't this woman (who was caught on camera) have lost her marbles and done something like this.

listen, I am all for finding the facts... but why are you people so quick to defend this woman by implying that The Must has anything to do with it? no matter what The Must could have done, nothing makes it okay for someone to come in and ransack your business before a busy holiday weekend!! seriously people, this was calculated and malicious. use your thining caps and really think about all possible senarios- none of them would justify breaking and entering.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 11:42AM – #12

Guest 11. I assume you were there? I assume you saw what happened? (the ONLY evidence allowed in a court is first hand evidence). I assume you saw the "video tape"? I am sure you read the polie report and interviewed all parties to this matter? If not your statement above is "hearsay", of which the DA would have no interest. But a civil suit in this matter may sweep up everyone that made comments.

What Julie has or has not done in the past, unless she has done what she is being accused of in the past, has no baring on the actual facts of this matter and a court would never take that into consideration. Let's wait for the arrest and conviction unless we have personal knowledge.

If you have actual facts share them with the DA/Police asap.

Howie on the Hill

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:05PM – #13

Presumption of Innocence

The presumption of innocence is essential to the criminal process. The mere mention of the phrase presumed innocent keeps judges and juries focused on the ultimate issue at hand in a criminal case: whether the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the alleged acts. The people of the United States have rejected the alternative to a presumption of innocence—a presumption of guilt—as being inquisitorial and contrary to the principles of a free society.

The Supreme Court has ruled that, under some circumstances, a court should issue jury instructions on the presumption of innocence in addition to instructions on the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt (Taylor v. Kentucky). A presumption of innocence instruction may be required if the jury is in danger of convicting the defendant on the basis of extraneous considerations rather than the facts of the case.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:32PM – #14

I don't claim to have ANY knowledge of what happened. But just like the banks that foreclose on your home or car dealerships that repo your car, I am just pointing out that there has to be more to the story. In these cases its actually legal to "break and enter right"?

I am sure that both sides have their version of the actual story but I am merely suggesting that breaking and entering the business where you have a key that contains several cameras is not the smartest thing to do.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:34PM – #15

listen... you can spout all you want about the facts and the law. i actually agree with you, innocent until proven guilty...... however, everyone that is saying this is actually implying that The Must brought this on themselves..... I am simply speaking from experience. if you read both of my posts, I don't actually accuse anyone of anything... just simply point out what I know of Julie and the owners of The Must.

I clearly lean towards the good owners fo the Must over what I have encountered with Julie from PERSONAL EXPERIENCES..... it seem clear that all of you who are spouting "facts and law" are personal friends of Julie Rico.

"Sweeping Civil Suit"... again, check these comments... no one is making any concrete statements. Seems the only one that would even threaten a civil suit would be Julie herself for slander.... of which there is NONE in any of these posts. Good luck with that, Julie!

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:45PM – #16

the only real truth is that all will be revealed very soon. we will see what side of the coin this actually falls on.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 12:58PM – #17

Dear #15

"Knowing a potenial suspect (Julie) and drawing from that potential guilt in a matter you have no "personal" knowlege of, is at best unethical. "Friendships" have nothig to do with either the law or facts of this specific case. In the end it is the law that is right, not our opinions. Thank goodness. Beacuse a person may be unpopular with anyone, a group or combine of people does not mean that person has commited a criminal act, as you seem to suggest, or perhaps imply. Makes no differentce who knows her, the police won't be asking you for your opinion of her, only if you have first hand knowledge of the facts in this case. This protects both you, her, and everyone from being judged by popular or general opinion.

July 4th, We Celebrate because we have Freedoms, such as a presumption of innocence. Mexico has a different system perhaps more to your liking? It's based on assumption of guilt, (French Law).

Howie

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:11PM – #19

Guest #17.... get a grip. No one is accusing anyone of anything at the moment, least of all me..... just bringing to light some character issues......

and you keep on defending someone and in doing so you keep implying that the other party has something to do with it. while you are certainly not as overt as i am with my opinions, you are giving yours non-the-less.

i am proud to be an american, don't make me out to be some anti-american, ignorant law breaker because i happen to have negative experiences with a particular person that may be involved with this case and choose to share it with everyone..... ever heard of the first amendment??? i have the right to speak and be heard- you don't have to like it, but you also don't have to accuse anyone with a similar opinion to being unpatriotic..... it is mind-numbingly childish.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:17PM – #20

I noticed on DTLA Tweets last night, someone from The Must (or I thought it was---actually, was it a tweet from Bert Greene?) wrote something about the store being robbed and blaming it on Julie Rico. I thought that was just a bit of inside humor, and the posting actually was merely advertisement for the business.

If not, the whole thing right sounds like a bad soap opera. For one small-business owner to be stealing from another out of spite seems very, very bizarre. It would be a case of life imitating art. Sort of like an episode of Jerry Seinfeld -- Soup Nazi! -- or a reality TV show.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:21PM – #21

Dear #19 you are wrong yet again. I am NOT defending ANYONE, I am stating the persons rights as an American to the presumtion of innocence that's our law. Our opinions mean nothing in this case, either way, only the facts. I have not stated anywhere I thought Julie was "innocent or guilty" in this matter. I have NO personal knowledge of this case beyond what I have read. And it is my belief at present neither do you. IF you do call the police asap.

Howie

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:28PM – #22

then, Howie, spare us all your chastisement. this a space for comments. no one is accusing anyone (how many times do i have to say that?) and i am entitled to my opinions on anyone and anything, and to share those opinions. no need for your civics lessons and finger pointing.... you are not above us because you can recite what we already know, nor are you going to teach us lessons or tell us what we can share or not share.....

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:39PM – #23

Dear #22

No one has pointed any fingers. I am pointing to American law. Like it or not. Free speech cut two ways. And yes there are a number of community people Retweeting that Julie Rico "robbed" The Must. IF thewy, you know such things report it to the cops.

Also I never spoke to your right of free speech. Of course you may say pretty much whatever you wish, even unpopular and hated "free" speech is protected. I honor your ability to speak freely, along with Julie's presumtion of innocence. And I am glad that you agree with the presumption of Innocence, and may agree that your prior opinions of Julie have nothing to do with this case or what she is being accused of by some. Regards, Howie

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 01:59PM – #24

COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENT FROM JULIE RICO Via E-mail to DTLAL Magazine 1:47 pm PDT: Downtown Los Angeles

(This is a) ...civil not criminal and Weeneez, LLC has been sold, and both spaces are under the possesion of a new owner.

Julie Rico Top Dog Weeneez LLC http://www.weeneez.com http://www.laartfest.org

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 02:03PM – #25

but you are pointing fingers, and taunting (would i like to be under mexican rule instead?). it is quite apparent you are quoting the law.... i mentioned that too.

prior experiences do not weigh on any facts, this is true. however, as a witness of character, i feel it is my duty to inform the readers of this blog and most importantly, this story, about my run-ins with one of the people allegedly involved in this case. i choose to share my opinion based on those experiences with the readers so that they may know a little about the history..... this is all. it is important to me that people are aware that this isn't an isolated incident nor is it something that would be out of character.... if it were true.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 02:07PM – #26

COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENT FROM JULIE RICO Via E-mail to DTLAL Magazine 1:47 pm PDT: Downtown Los Angeles

"(This is a) ...civil not criminal and Weeneez, LLC has been sold, and both spaces are under the possesion of a new owner."

Julie Rico Top Dog Weeneez LLC http://www.weeneez.com http://www.laartfest.org

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 02:12PM – #27

so now Julie says that the business was sold..... but how does that explain someone breaking and entering??

let me be clear- there is a sign on the Must's door that says they actually took their reservation book!! let's for a minute assume that somehow all the furniture inside was the previous owner of weeneez's..... or whoever, what is the purpose of taking the inventory of wine AND reservation list???

the theft of this reservation book puts this into a different light entirely and everyone needs to know this. this is not about business changing hands. and i doubt, thought i clearly don't know the whole law (howie), that someone can just nullify the sub-lease because the business was sold. what about the rights of The Must??

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 02:18PM – #28

Guest #28 Again, I am speaking only to known "facts" I see no reason to speculate on something that at this time is a civil matter. I don't need to "build" a case, the DA does. But as it stands now she has responded. True? I don't know, I am not party to the particulars of the sublease to Must Bar. Nasty people can be innocent and innocent looking peole may be consider guilty. Has noithing to do with character, it's about facts.

Howie

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 02:28PM – #29

Julie Rico has an online bio that reads "I am strange and creative, yet normal woman from Michigan..."

People willing to make a go of it in uncharted territory like the abandoned or formerly very shabby 5th Street section of downtown are more likely to be eccentric. Sometimes that eccentricity can lead to unpleasant results. The people who've made the saying "the check is in the mail" both laughable and notorious includes the overly creative and flaky.

When people are too la-de-dah they can inadvertently (or, worse, purposefully) not manage things correctly. That can cause lots of disruption and unwittingly burn a lot of bridges.

The community was built by people like Julie Rico and Coly Haan. When they can't make a go of it, or ruin things for one another, the neighborhood ends up getting hurt in the process.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 02:44PM – #30

AMEN #30 AMEN!

"The community was built by people like Julie Rico and Coly Haan. When they can't make a go of it, or ruin things for one another, the neighborhood ends up getting hurt in the process."

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 03:12PM – #32

well howie, there have been 4 cop cars and at least 8 policemen on site for the past hour. Sure sounds uncivil to me.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 03:19PM – #33

There needs to be a police report, then the DA makes a decision as to how the City for the People of Losangeles are going to handle the issue, ei: is this a civil matter or a crimminal matter. That dear friend is a matter for the police to decide, not for those trading in "hear-say". And I have not said who I think may or may not be guilty of this alledged crime, nor will I, makes no difference to the outcme, THE FACTS.

Enjoy your 4th of July and report back any important updates.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 03:29PM – #35

There have been recent posts that Police have responded to The Must Bar this afternoon. Posters saying there may have been an attempted burglary. One person has named Julio Rico's "boyfriend" as the alledged suspect. The plot thickens...we shall see. No news on arrests, if any at present.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 03:52PM – #36

IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING THE MUST http://twitpic.com/22huxq

Howie

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 04:59PM – #37

Ok...well even if the business was sold and there is a new management coming in...Doesn't the MUST HAVE THE RIGHT TO KEEP EVERYTHING THAT THEY PAID FOR? So no thirty days notice? No warning? i sat with casey at the bar friday night and said..."thanks! see you tomorrow!" He said "yup...you know it" So law, civil, robbery, breaking, entering, blah blah blah. A business has the right to keep everything that they paid for. No one has the right to sneak in on a Friday night at 2:30 of a holiday weekend, change the locks, and take everything out of a space that someone else knows. PERIOD>

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 05:22PM – #38

Wondering what "The Must" owners and Julie have to say and why they haven't made comments telling each side of the story. Perhaps they are leaving it up to the LAPD to work out?

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 06:28PM – #39

The link in #37 goes to a photo of a sign that has the following words. Assuming the sign is real, what happened at The Must doesn't appear to have been a burglary, at least in the traditional sense.

ATTENTION MUST EMPLOYEES AND PATRONS:

The Must Wine Bar has closed and we are very sorry for the inconvenience.

This premise will re-open under new management as JP Lounge on August 9, 2010.

ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE MUST ARE ENCOURAGED TO APPLY FOR THE NEW CONCEPT.

Applications are at Weeneez.

Thank you, Management

^ The sign maker, by the way, should have written "these premises" instead of "this premise."

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 09:53PM – #42

I think this kind of thing happens all the time: businesses get sold, bought , merge, etc...

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 09:55PM – #43

Is this the same Must that has fired like three chefs in 12 months after that expose of them serving rancid food and getting people sick?

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 10:02PM – #44

I just checked with the police: the watch commander said no police report was filed because a crime was not committed.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 10:24PM – #45

come on guest # 45, people at the seen said all their stuff is gone, stolen, that is not a crime? last time i checked, theft is a crime!!!

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 10:30PM – #46

this is guest # 45: i asked the commander about their equipment. he said there was another notice on the door that said their equipment was moved, not stolen and that they can get their belongings anytime.

Guest on July 04, 2010, at 10:50PM – #47

Can someone go steal Weeneez and put in a real restaurant?

Guest on July 05, 2010, at 12:04PM – #49

Anyone have a positive Julie Rico business story? How about 1 out of 10? 1 out of 50? 1 out of 100? I'll take 1, just 1 positive business story.

Guest on July 06, 2010, at 07:32AM – #50

"Howie on the Hill" pretends he's a lawyer but he's clearly barely literate.

Shut up, dude. Smart and literate people live downtown now. Your schtick is tired.

Fucker.

Guest on July 06, 2010, at 11:23AM – #52

LOL, this shows how out of touch and OLD real estate and property managers are in Los Angeles. Downtown has what is probably the best/most loyal foodie following in southern California. I know people that drive from Pasadena just to go to The Must for a dinner. If anyone thinks that the new business has a chance in hell at surviving this fiasco you may as well commit yourself to a psych ward. This new place may as well be serving up the plague, nobody is going to come here. Everyone in Downtown/SoCal knows what happened, it wasn't done under the radar, the new biz is screwed. You may as well have cleared out the Lakers locker room and brought a new team in. Downtown has the most loyal people around, and nobody living around here is going to support this nonsense.... silly old folks, tricks are for kids

Guest on July 06, 2010, at 03:03PM – #53

How much trouble could I get in for pooping in ftont of Weenez front door every day until she closes shop and leaves town? Are we talking jail time or a fine? How big a fine?

Certainly I can train my dog to poop in front of her store and get off with a littering ticket at most, right?

Anyone want to have a big breakfast at the Pantry then head over to Weenez with some coffee and cigarettes?

Guest on July 07, 2010, at 01:17AM – #54

Fraud anyone?

Guest on July 07, 2010, at 06:44PM – #55

Same bunch of Queens squibbling and cat fighting. Nails and threats. Gays never get over it. Queens will be Queens. Bitch about one thing and then another. Why not stick to the topic The Must. - Not vague issues and assorted people you just don't like. All you are doing is pulling attention away from the real important people THE MUST. Mr. B. get over it. Your rantings are over 5 years old. Snore.