A pair of 15-year-old females are accused of conspiring to carry out a school shooting in Southern California — and they allegedly had a hit list.
Authorities said the investigation began Oct. 6 after the FBI alerted the Corona Police Department and the Riverside County Sheriff's Office about social media threats targeting Corona High School, KABC-TV reported.
'The average suspect that commits a crime like this is going to do it independently or by themselves, and it is not very common for them to be females.'
Detectives arrested a female who attends Corona High School, the station said, adding that detectives then identified and arrested another girl who attends Norco High School after a search of several homes in Riverside County and an examination of electronic devices and messages.
KABC, citing police, said search warrants uncovered evidence that the teenage females had spent several months researching school shootings and discussing how they could potentially carry out an attack at Corona High School.
The investigation also revealed the pair discussed how they could obtain weapons to carry out the attack, police told the station.
Authorities said no weapons were found during the home searches, KABC noted, adding that both teens remain in custody on charges of conspiracy to commit murder.
KCBS-TV reported that the Riverside County District Attorney's Office said it couldn't confirm the charges or the suspects' identities because of their ages.
"The average suspect that commits a crime like this is going to do it independently or by themselves, and it is not very common for them to be females," Corona Police Lt. Robert Montanez told KCBS, while adding that the suspects had a map of the high school campus and ways to get around the law and acquire guns, as well as "specifics how they would carry out the attack."
KCBS added that the teens allegedly had a list of targets that included both students and teachers — and potentially were planning some sort of revenge.
Research cited by NPR found that only about 3% of school shootings involve female perpetrators, KABC reported.
Those with information about this case are urged to call Corona Police Det. Edwards at 951-279-3656 or email george.edwards@coronaca.gov, KABC added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Kamala Harris has made election integrity a big talking point ahead of the midterms. The former vice president’s latest claims of cheating raise an obvious question: Does she object to voter-roll maintenance itself, or can she identify a lawful safeguard she actually supports?
At an appearance in South Korea last week, the former vice president alleged “overt cheating” in American elections, citing voter-roll purges. In September, she accused officials of “cheating by purging voter rolls.” Over the summer, she also criticized the SAVE America Act for requiring documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
Harris can keep calling voter-roll purges ‘cheating.’ But California’s unanswered questions and New Jersey’s documented registration failure demand more than talking points.
Harris wants to turn basic election safeguards into the boogeyman of election administration. But isn’t the point to ensure that only American citizens vote in our elections?
Election officials must not improperly remove eligible voters. They also have an obligation to identify ineligible registrations. Harris talks about purges without making that distinction. Americans deserve to know which safeguards she opposes and why.
Start with California, Harris’ home state. On Monday, the Justice Department charged 28 lawful permanent residents with federal election-related offenses, including fraudulent registration and illegal voting. Eleven were arrested. The charges are allegations, not convictions, but the cases warrant serious attention.
Federal prosecutors say all 28 appeared on a list of more than 20,000 people the government believes are likely noncitizens registered in California. The Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security sued the state on October 15, seeking to stop ballots attributed to people on that list from being counted until their citizenship is verified.
Governor Gavin Newsom (D) called the lawsuit an attempt to “suppress California voters.” The state should be able to show how it verifies eligibility and corrects its rolls.
It cannot. A separate public records response exposes an accounting problem: California’s statewide voter-registration system “does not contain a voter status reason for cancellation due to non-citizenship.” The state could not provide a count of registrations canceled for that specific reason. Why not?
New Jersey supplies an even clearer example of why verification cannot be an afterthought. In July, Governor Mikie Sherrill (D) acknowledged that a “serious software error” had registered approximately 6,600 people who answered “no” when asked whether they were U.S. citizens during motor vehicle transactions. The “error” occurred between June 2023 and June 2024.
RELATED:California makes ‘massive concession’ in lawsuit over 20,000 'likely noncitizen' voters, DOJ says
A subsequent state accounting found that about 340 newly registered people had actually voted. New Jersey claims it has no evidence that those votes changed an election result. That does not excuse a system that registered people after they expressly declined to attest to citizenship.
At a House Judiciary hearing in September, I noted that at least three New Jersey elections in 2025 were decided by a single vote or ended in a tie. When a race is that close, election officials cannot shrug off registration errors.
New Jersey voters understand the stakes. A Rutgers-Eagleton poll released this month found that 82% of state residents support requiring photo ID to vote in person, while 71% favor documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register.
Even Sherrill has expressed support for voter ID. That requirement establishes identity; proof of citizenship establishes eligibility. They serve different purposes, and neither question should be brushed aside with a slogan about voter suppression.
Minnesota has its own lesson in the need for clear rules. Governor Tim Walz (D) signed a 2023 law that lets residents get standard driver’s licenses without proving lawful immigration status. During an October 2025 legislative hearing, state Rep. Patti Anderson (R) pressed state elections director Paul Linnell on whether those licenses could be used as voter identification. He failed to give a direct yes-or-no answer.
Minnesota does permit a driver’s license as proof of residence for Election Day registration. Citizenship eligibility is a separate requirement. Election officials should be able to explain the distinction simply, especially when lawmakers ask about vulnerabilities.
Accurate voter rolls, citizenship verification, and clear identity rules protect the votes of eligible Americans. Officials should explain how those safeguards work and correct failures when they find them.
Harris can keep calling voter-roll purges “cheating.” But California’s unanswered questions and New Jersey’s documented registration failure demand more than talking points. If she believes these safeguards are improper, she should explain which ones — and what she would do instead.
A convicted serial rapist in California who was originally sentenced to 124 years in prison has been released after serving approximately 20 years behind bars. Many are outraged that the serial rapist, who also is the great-grandson of legendary cosmetics mogul Max Factor, was released from prison after being convicted of drugging and sexually assaulting multiple women.
NBC News reported that 62-year-old Andrew Luster was released from prison on parole on Oct. 11 "after serving his full sentence as required by law," according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
'By drugging his victims into a coma-like state, Andrew Luster played Russian roulette with the lives of his victims so he could abuse their comatose bodies.'
The Ventura County Star reported that Luster is registered as a sex offender on California's Megan's Law website, with a Glendora address — and he will have to register as a sex offender for life and will be on supervised parole for the next three years.
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said in a statement released on Sunday that "this is not an early release."
"According to voter-approved propositions, determinate-sentenced incarcerated individuals may reduce their carceral time due to the earning of worktime and good conduct credits," the CDCR continued. "In this case, Andrew Luster received 977 days of pre-sentence credit and was eligible for credit-earning opportunities while incarcerated."
Luster was first arrested in July 2000 after a college student accused him of raping her at his home, according to court documents obtained by People magazine.
People magazine said investigators discovered a video of Luster drugging and raping the victim as well as two other women while executing a search warrant at his home.
More from People:
His trial began in late 2002, and two weeks in, he was able to convince the judge to lift the conditions of his parole so that he could visit his lawyer in Los Angeles over the holidays. Luster — who claims he knew little about this plan and that it was orchestrated by one of his lawyers — soon found himself hiding out in Mexico after paying someone to sneak him over the border.
In June 2003, Luster was heading out for a taco when he was apprehended by popular bounty hunter Duane "Dog" Chapman in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, the Guardian reported, adding that that witnesses told police that Chapman's crew "had used an aerosol spray and handcuffs to subdue the rapist, bundled him into one of their two vans, and drove off."
The Los Angeles Times previously reported that Luster was convicted on 86 counts of rape and drug charges after a jury viewed videotapes he made of himself engaging in sexual acts with three women rendered unconscious by GHB — or gamma-hydroxybutyrate, a "date-rape" drug.
Fox News reported that Luster's 124-year prison sentence was thrown out in March 2013, and he was resentenced to 50 years behind bars because the original judge reportedly made a legal error.
J. David Nick, who represented Luster during his efforts to overturn the sentence, said in an interview that the original judge improperly stacked prison terms without making the findings required under California law, according to Fox News.
Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko said in 2024 that releasing Luster would be a "grave injustice to the survivors and a threat to public safety," KCAL-TV reported.
According to Nasarenko, Luster "preyed upon young women, primarily in college bars" between 1996 and 2000 while he was in his early 30s, drugging his victims with GHB.
"Luster engaged in sadistic sexual abuse of their comatose bodies," Nasarenko stated in 2024. "In two of the attacks, Luster recorded his rape and sexual abuse of the victims."
Ventura County Senior Deputy District Attorney Anthony Wold condemned the possibility of Luster's release in a 2025 statement:
By drugging his victims into a coma-like state, Andrew Luster played Russian roulette with the lives of his victims so he could abuse their comatose bodies. Even now, he attempts to rewrite the history of his heinous crimes to falsely mitigate his culpability to gain early release. He remains a highly dangerous sexual predator. We continue to maintain he should serve his full sentence. He's earned it.
However, the Ventura County District Attorney's Office said Luster was scheduled to be released from prison no later than Oct. 31, 2026.
KCAL reported that Luster is living in Glendora, which has drawn outrage from city leaders.
"The city of Glendora is beyond disappointed," Mayor David Fredendall stated. "We are outraged."
Fredendall blamed Luster's early release on Proposition 57, a California ballot measure voters approved in 2016 that expanded parole eligibility and sentence-reduction credits for eligible offenders.
"When California voters approved Proposition 57 in 2016, they were assured by Governor Jerry Brown and his administration that dangerous offenders would remain behind bars," Fredendall continued. "His campaign went so far as to promise that sex offenders would be 'absolutely ineligible for parole under Prop 57.'"
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation stated that Proposition 57 was "overwhelmingly approved by voters in the November 2016 election to enhance public safety, to stop the revolving door of crime by emphasizing rehabilitation, and to prevent federal courts from releasing prisoners."
The CDCR said Prop 57 also "establishes a parole consideration process for determinately sentenced and indeterminately sentenced people convicted of nonviolent crimes, as defined by California Penal Code, who have served the full term for their primary criminal offense and who demonstrate they no longer pose a current, unreasonable risk to the public."
According to the CDCR, Proposition 57 "gives incarcerated people the opportunity to earn additional credits for good behavior and participation in rehabilitative, educational, and career training programs so they are better prepared to succeed and less likely to commit new crimes on the outside."
Meanwhile, Fredendall added, "The State may argue that this was not technically an early release. It can point to sentencing credits, legal calculations, and administrative requirements. However, those technical explanations do not address the larger concern: how an individual originally sentenced to 124 years in prison for heinous crimes is able to walk out of a secured facility after only 20 years."
Fredendall continued, "The people of Glendora should not have to worry about their safety because of a decision by the State that allows an individual with a history of rape and violence to now live in close proximity to schools, parks, playgrounds, churches, and community centers."
"The victims deserve better. The people of Glendora deserve better. California must do better," the mayor demanded.
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation did not immediately provide more details to Fox News regarding Luster's release date, an explanation of the sentencing calculations, and details about his parole supervision.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Immigration and Customs Enforcement was roped into a murder investigation in California after a woman went missing a few weeks ago and was later found dead.
On October 4, a cousin of Jasmine Gill reported that she had gone missing, according to the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office. The last time Jasmine was seen was on September 30 at her home in Sacramento.
The charred remains discovered in El Dorado County on October 1 were determined to be Jasmine Gill.
Jasmine's husband, Gurinder Gill, told investigators that ICE had nabbed Jasmine when she went out to get the mail, the sheriff's office said. However, ICE confirmed to the sheriff's office and to Blaze News that no immigration enforcement had been conducted at that residence.
Additionally, investigators began to find "several inconsistencies in Gurinder's statements about his wife's disappearance," the sheriff's office continued. Officials also learned that the couple were in the midst of a contentious divorce and custody battle.
Husband accused of killing wife after claiming ICE agents detained her
Meanwhile, their worst fears about the missing woman were confirmed when charred remains discovered in El Dorado County, California, on October 1 were determined to be Jasmine Gill.
Gurinder Gill, 28, was arrested on murder charges last Wednesday and booked into the Sacramento County jail, where he remains. Jail records state that he is "ineligible for bail."
Court records note that Gill had an arraignment hearing on Friday, but do not say whether he entered a plea or retained counsel. He is scheduled to appear in court again on December 7, according to SFGate.
The Sacramento County public defender's office told Blaze News Wednesday morning that the defendant's name was not in its files.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Los Angeles officials appear to have made a damning concession in a filing related to the legal feud over 20,000 people identified as "likely noncitizens" who are registered to vote.
In a lawsuit filed Thursday, the Department of Justice demanded that state and L.A. County officials refrain from tabulating the vote-by-mail ballots of the individuals in question, at least for the federal election in less than two weeks. California automatically sends out a mail-in ballot to all registered voters.
'California has not acted on the list of 20,000 suspected noncitizens or agreed to set aside their ballots. American citizens’ votes are being diluted in California.'
Earlier this month, California officials denied a similar request from the federal government and accused the government of making difficult demands to cause a political spectacle.
On Monday, the DOJ requested an emergency temporary restraining order to force officials to set aside the potentially illegal ballots, but the state's officials are still rebelling.
California officials filed motions to oppose the emergency TRO on Tuesday — and soon after, First Assistant United States Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli posted a damning admission to the state's cause.
"Massive concession: Los Angeles election officials just told a federal court they have no independent way to verify citizenship beyond what voters attest. (They simply take their word for it)," he posted in a statement on social media.
"Under federal law, only citizens may vote in federal elections," he added. "Yet California has not acted on the list of 20,000 suspected noncitizens or agreed to set aside their ballots. American citizens’ votes are being diluted in California."
Essayli pointed to a section from the motion where a Los Angeles official said officials were not "equipped" to meet the citizenship certification demands of the government in time for the election.
"The Registrar is not equipped or authorized to verify voter citizenship because it does not independently house citizenship-related information beyond the voter attestation as identified in federal and state law (such as, among other things, immigration records, travel records, naturalization records, etc.) and certainly is not equipped to do so within the election period," the defendants wrote.
Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom of California responded through his press office on social media.
"California adheres to Federal Law passed by Congress in the 1990s [see 52 U.S.C. 20504(c)(2) (Section 5 of the NVRA)]. May want to brush up on your election law before tweeting. Perhaps Second Assistant is more apt from now on?" the official account wrote.
RELATED: Ninth Circuit Court SLAPS DOWN Newsom law restricting ICE operations
He also responded via social media to the first lawsuit filed by the Justice Department over the possibly ineligible voters.
"This is a sad, desperate attempt by Trump to use his politicized Justice Department to try to suppress California voters just three weeks before Election Day," the governor said.
"Courts have made clear the federal government has no role in running state elections," he added. "We will defend free and fair elections in the Golden State and call out every authoritarian attempt to undermine our democracy."
While California is very left-leaning, there are some competitive congressional races that could help determine whether Democrats seize control of the House.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
A violent criminal who had been convicted of rape and was on the run was found dead in San Diego, police say.
Merle Wakefield, 69, was being supervised on California's conditional release program when officials got a tamper notice from his monitoring device on Sept. 25.
'As long as the state keeps releasing sexually violent predators into our neighborhoods, families are one tampered ankle monitor away from this. These people don't belong anywhere near our communities.'
When the officials arrived at his workplace in Rancho Bernardo, they found the GPS device, but Wakefield was gone.
Nearly a month later on Monday at about 9:30 a.m., San Diego police responded to a report of a dead body and found human remains in a riverbed in San Diego.
The San Diego County Medical Examiner's Office identified the remains as Merle Wakefield. His cause and manner of death will be determined by an autopsy.
The rapist's remains were found about 20 miles south of the location where he was last seen.
Wakefield had been convicted of rape as well as lewd acts with a minor under 14, along with eight other convictions and 20 arrests.
He was granted conditional release in Nov. 2024.
It's unclear how Wakefield died.
San Diego police said they are continuing to investigate the man's death.
RELATED: California man allegedly coerced 21 children to produce sex videos via online apps, FBI says
San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond criticized the state of California after Wakefield vanished.
"The unfortunate reality is that what happened with Merle Wakefield could have happened at any time," Demond said.
"As long as the state keeps releasing sexually violent predators into our neighborhoods, families are one tampered ankle monitor away from this. These people don't belong anywhere near our communities. They belong locked up in a secure state facility. Period."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
A quite recent chief of staff to Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom is awaiting sentencing for fraud, so David French says that voters who are tired of fraud blame Republicans and will elect Democrats.
Voters Los Angeles won't verify are citizens have already been sent ballots as part of California's midterm election season, which lasts an entire month.
The Oversight Project argues California courts overstepped their jurisdiction in disbarring Trump attorney John Eastman.
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com