In the last few weeks, a great many news outlets have have run stories on the city’s newest phenomenon—The LA Gang Tour.

The NY Times did two stories, NPR did one, the LA Times also ran two—a news story and an op ed.) Some foreign publications ran the usual Isn’t-California-Strange?-variety articles, and such websites as Truthout, and that of author/blogger Tom Diaz have written about the gang tours with happy abandon.

In fact the NY Times even quoted me on the matter. And then, this week, Diaz quoted them, quoting me, albeit not in the most entirely flattering fashion. (But Tom and I have since chatted via email about the matter.)

It seems, Diaz thought I believed the tour to be a swell idea-–which is how my out-of-context bit of nattering to the NY Times guy made it sound. (NOTE TO SELF: Don’t talk to reporters. They’re clearly a scurrilous and untrustworthy lot. Uh, no, wait…)

Diaz was making the point that, to be truly authentic, some of the stops on any real gang tour ought to include places like the ER, the morgue, and Rancho Los Amigos, the place where all the gangsters with gun-shot-related spinal cord injuries go to be treated, all of which is hard to argue.

I assured Tom that my true opinion of the gang tour thingy (which I expressed to the NY Times guy, who is actually a nice fellow) is that the tour, and the kerfuffle surrounding it, was a bit silly—but that it was unlikely to bring down the empire since the actual tour seemed to have very little to do with—you know—gangs.

Here, for example, is a list of the 11 tour destinations that LA Gang Tour website tells us will let tour-goers be the “FIRST IN THE HISTORY OF LOS ANGELES TO EXPERIENCE AREAS THAT WERE FORBIDDEN…UNTIL NOW! ”

So what are these terrifying pockets of LA’s gangster culture? (You might want to send any children out of the room before reading on.)

They are:

Two jails

One detention center

One sheriff’s station

Skid Row—which, while distressing, isn’t terribly “forbidden,” nor is it gang-related.

The banks of the LA River, the graffiti on which was, regrettably, painted over right before the tour. (Even the tour description admits that this location is more of a movie set than it is a gang hang-out. But it is, in actual fact, a cool place to check out if you’ve never been. ‘Twas sad that the city developed a case of self-consciousness and decided to frantically paint over the cacophony of color.)

The Pico Union Graff lab —A non-profit program that lets kids explore the notion of urban art—aka graffiti et al— in a safe, legal, drug free setting. Nice that the tour is spotlighting it, I guess.

The site of the Symbionese Liberation Army shoot out at 1466 E. 54th Street in LA. Not sure what this has to do with gangs. But thanks to the miracle of Google Street view you too can check out the infamous location from your laptop or iPhone.

Florence Avenue.. Last time I checked, Florence Ave was….well…..a street. That people drive down. Daily. Going to work. And school. (Okay, yeah, I’m sure the tour bus passed by Florence and Normandie, which isn’t gang related, It’s LA Riots-related, but I supposed there’s some I guess.)

The birthplace of the Black Panther Party. Huh? The Black Panthers were founded in Oakland, for God’s sake. Even I know that. (Note to gang tour planners. Wikipedia is your friend.)

That leaves the two semi-legitimate parts of the so-called LA gang tour: both have to do with a drive through Florencia 13’s neighborhood, a gang that is described as being part of the Zoot Suit Riots, which no credible history of that period that I’ve been able to find seems to verify. But, okay, whatever.

Like I said: silly.

And much ado about not a whole lot-–especially since, for the most part, the only people who seem interested in the endeavor are all the journalists opining mightily about the thing.

Now, as you can see, I have added myself to the throng.

It should be noted, however, that the proceeds for the gang tour are, according to organizer Alfred Lomas, being plowed back into South LA communities to create jobs. Since jobs are so desperately needed, it is hard to be too critical of the strategy.

So, as it turns out, yeah, I guess the NY Times quoted me correctly after all. Gang tours? What the heck. I’m for ‘em..

(Photo of Alfred Lomas by Ben Bergman, NPR.)

Around 11:30, at the end of the closed hearing that began at 10 a.m. Alex Sanchez attorney Kerry Bensinger came out of the federal courtroom to talk to Sanchez family and a very, very small handful of supporters, whom he drew into a side room and broke the news. U.S. District Judge Manuel Real had granted Alex Sanchez bail.

One thing that can be said for the staggeringly quirky Real, he continues to surprise. This time the surprise was a good one for Sanchez and family.

The bail amount is set at $2 million. It is to be divided into $1 million in properties, $1 million in surities.

Since Sanchez supporters and family have already gathered $1.4 million in property, and $1 million in surities, “it’s only a matter of the paperwork,” said Monica Novoa, a Homies Unidos board member who is very close to the family and thus was in the room.

Understandably, there will be stringent restrictions, which have been agreed upon but not been spelled out publicly. (There will, for instance, be no contact allowed with active gang members.)

“But any of it’s fine,” said Novoa. “We really feel that this is the beginning of a fair trial for Alex. He’ll be able to see his family, sleep in his own bed, meet with his attorney, and work for his own defense. That’s all we ever asked for.”

As to who was inside the closed hearing, there were assuredly LAPD officers. And there was supposed to be someone from inside City Hall or failing that, someone who works closely with City Hall and who knows the LA gang world and the gang intervention world. (Connie Rice, for example, would be on the latter list.)

I have heard floating rumors that the City Hall someone inside the closed courtroom may possibly have been City Council Member Tony Cardenas.

If true, this makes a great deal of sense. The mayor’s gang czar, Guillermo Cespedes, could have concievably been called in but he’d have had little or nothing concrete to add to the conversation in the way of personal knowledge, as he didn’t take over his post until September (Sanchez was arrested last June) and prior to the gang czar gig, he was running Summer Night Lights thus would have had no reason to deeply interact with Sanchez and the area of town in which the government alleges Sanchez was operating.

There is former gang czar, Jeff Carr, the mayor’s chief of staff. But Carr, while he’d worked with Sanchez and would be deemed knowledgeable, would have been unwise to come down on one side or the other of this very controversy-fraught case because, either way he leaned he would risk alienating a group that is important to the mayor. In short, his appearance, no matter how super secret, would have been a no-win for Carr or his boss Antonio.

Cardenas, however, is arguably the most knowledgeable of the three. He has a long-term professional relationship with Sanchez and other gang interventionists and gang recovery agencies—and with the police— due to his multi-year chairmanship of the Council’s Ad-hoc Committee on Gang Violence and Youth Development. Thus, with the right phone calls, he was in a position to gather some genuine intel from both sides of the argument, plus he likely has a gut take on the case of his own.

Although I have criticized Cardenas plenty of times over the years, I have also known him to, at times, show an unusual amount of moral courage when the cameras were turned off and there was nothing to gain, especially for a politician.

So, while I don’t know if the mystery City Hall person was Tony Cardenas, he would be my pick as the one whom Judge Real would have been wise to call. Had he been called in, I would like to think he would have told what he believed to be the real truth—whatever that real truth might be.

More as I have it.

UPDATE: Both Tom Hayden at the Nation and Tom Diaz at Fairly Civil report that, according paperwork filed in the federal district court, the prosecutor’s witness list has been made public.

Diaz notes that the three expert witnesses made available by the prosecution were:

1. FBI Supervisory Special Agent Robert W. Clark, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the Los Angeles Field Office.

2. LAPD Capt. Justin Eisenberg, Commanding Officer of the Gangs and Narcotics Division.

3. Former federal prosecutor Bruce K. Riordan, now Director of Anti-Gang Operations for the L.A. City Attorney’s Office. Riordan is also Chief of the Gang Division and Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division.

I know little about the first two, but Bruce Riordan in particular was a smart choice. He has a broad base of experience and he is very much a straight shooter. What his opinion would have been on the issues surrounding Sanchez and his bail is unknown.

The identity of the witness or witnesses called by Sanchez’s attorneys remains sealed.

In the courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge Manuel Real, the latest bail hearing for Alex Sanchez, held took a sharp turn on Wednesday morning, causing Sanchez supporters to bask cautiously in what seemed to be a small but tangible glimmer of hope.

The changed atmosphere at the hearing seemed presaged when Sanchez was ushered into the courtroom in casual slacks and a shirt, rather than the jail house jumpsuit and shackles that have characterized his previous appearances. On the way in, he managed to flash his family a smile that, while it did not exactly make it to cheerful, was clearly striving for upbeat.

At the last bail hearing, Judge Real repeatedly interrupted and corrected Sanchez’s court-appointed attorney, Kerry Bensinger, disallowing most of the material that Bensinger sought to present in order to counter the prosecution’s contention that Sanchez should be denied bail as he was both dangerous and a flight risk. However yesterday’s Judge Real appeared to be in a whole different mood and, while he questioned Bensinger at times, he remained even tempered.

This time around, most of Judge Real’s most aggressive challenges were aimed at the younger of the two government prosecutors, Elizabeth Carpenter, who grew visibly flustered at Real’s sudden change in direction.

Perhaps the oddest moment in the exchange was when Carpenter told the judge that the defendant’s supporters had “publicly stated” that Sanchez “could not get a fair trial” in Real’s court.

Well, what evidence did she have of such a thing? the judge wanted to know. (Cough—this blog and the Nation magazine—cough, cough) Surely the defendant and his lawyer had not stated that?

“No, no,” said Carpenter, back-peddling rapidly, Mr. Bensinger had not made any such statements. “But the defendant’s supporters certainly have, including one who had signed an affidavit of surety.”

(At this, veteran civil rights attorney Jorge Gonzalez elbowed Tom Hayden who, at an earlier hearing, had offered his house as part of a guarantee of bail for Sanchez. Hayden studiously ignored the elbowing.)

Judge Real, however, fastened on to the statement with gusto. “But those are lay people,” he roared. “They don’t know anything about the law!” Appearing fond of his words, Real repeated them. “That’s someone who knows absolutely nothing about the law!”

Then Real fixed Carpenter with a steely gaze. Surely she wasn’t trying to paint the defendant with those statements, he asked her. At that Carpenter backed away from the subject altogether and turned to explaining why Sanchez was a flight risk.

This too, Real challenged.

Well, where exactly would he flee to? the judge wanted to know. Carpenter hesitated. “Where will he go?” Real asked again. After all, Real pointed out, Sanchez had been granted political asylum because of the danger El Salvador presented to him, did the government have any reason to believe he would flee there?

The government did. But in a complete 180 from his hardline view of Sanchez’s flight risk potential at the last bail hearing, Real further questioned the prosecution’s assumption. Carpenter was left muttering something about Sanchez fleeing to South American countries without extradition treaties while the judge looked exasperated.

Yet the most startling incident came slightly later in the hearing when Carpenter was explaining why Sanchez was too dangerous and gang involved to be granted bail and Real again challenged her assertions. Had Sanchez been arrested or had any kind of negative police contact in the years between the asylum decision and the case before the court? Sanchez asked. He had not, Carpenter admitted.

Well, Judge Real said finally, “Isn’t there a possibility that you and Mr. Bensinger can get together and choose someone, maybe the person in charge of gang programs for the City, or someone of like authority with the LAPD who could come in and testify whether they have any evidence of continuing gang involvement by Mr. Sanchez. Perhaps we could arrange for a closed hearing to allow that person to testify frankly without fear of revealing critical information.” [These notes on dialogue are approximate.]

The 40 or so observers in the court tried not to stare open-mouthed.

And with that, Judge Real ordered the hearing to resume on January 13, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. The gavel came down. And that was that.

“What to make of it?” wrote Jorge Gonzalez when he emailed me later. “Who knows? Is the Judge merely making like he is sincerely considering the defense arguments for the appellate courts and the public?” (As a trial attorney, Gonzalez is very familiar with Real and his courtroom habits.) “Maybe, but if he leaves the door open a crack [Bensinger] is obligated to stick a foot in and put forth more positive evidence for him to consider. He will make the case that surely there must be a way that, given certain conditions, the rights of the defendant and considerations of the safety of the community can be satisfied.” It looked like supporters came out of the courtroom cautiously hopeful, he said, “that they might be able to persuade the Judge of the merits of that statement.”

Tom Hayden’s reaction was similar. “Taken literally,” he wrote in his own email after the hearing, “the judge’s order means that the city’s top gang reduction official, Guillermo Cespedes, and a top LAPD gang expert appointed by the new Chief Charles Beck would be asked, or even subpoenaed, to state what they know about Alex Sanchez from the past decade. Since city and police officials have often collaborated with Sanchez in the past, the public record might place them at odds with former CRASH officer Frank Flores, the prosecution’s expert witness.”

But, like Gonzales, Hayden was reluctant to be too optimistic. “There is no predicting whether this represents an unprecedented approach to conflict resolution,” he wrote, “or merely a step by the judge to prove to the critics that he is holding an exhaustive hearing, and armor-plating himself against a future appeal, before denying Sanchez bail once again. ”

And so the all-too-human legal drama continues. Stay tuned.

PS: And, for those of you who are not as entirely riveted by the Sanchez drama as some of the rest of us, take a look at this article on the already controversial UCLA study that contends legalizing undocumented immigrants would boost California’s sagging economy. Anna Gorman reports for the LA Times.

PPS: OMG, how could I have missed this?! Apple has rented a stage at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in SF on January 26 [changed to Wed, 1/27] for a “a major product announcement.” OMG! OMG! Could it be? An Apple tablet! An iReader! (Cue loud version of Apple boot-up cord along with visual of Apple logo bathed in heavenly shaft of light.)

David Carr at the NY Times is busy making up possible names for the possible thang (which is already possibly named the iSlate).

Hmmm. Must cut down on consumption of food and electricity so that I can afford the doubtlessly absurdly expensive gadget if indeed it is to be introduced in exactly 20 days. (Not that I’m counting.)

(And yes, this is a social justice issue. How could you think otherwise?)

PPPS: Oh, yeah, and the governor gave some kind of speech. More on that later on.

THE ACADEMIC & THE DROPOUTS

I remember several years ago when I watched Dr. Mikala Rahn give a presentation of some research or other that she and her nonprofit educational consulting firm, Public Works Inc, had put together at the behest of the LA Unified School board, at the time she struck me as unusually smart and savvy.

Former school board member David Tokofsky remembers her that way too. “Mikala would get up and talk about something the board had been discussing for weeks, and it two sentences she’d have laid it out. And I’d think, Okay, there. That’s exactly it.”

This is why, Tokofsky says, he has recently taken a consulting gig with Rahn’s newest nonprofit venture, a Pasadena-located continuation charter high school (with a middle school added this past September) designed for young men and women who want a high school diploma but who, for one reason or another have dropped out—or been tossed out—of mainstream public schools.

Rahn calls the school by the plain wrap name of Learning Works.

THE CHASERS

But Learning Works is anything but a plain wrap endeavor. For one thing, in addition to the combination of home study and in-school teaching strategies that Rahn and company employ, the school also has what they informally call their “Chasers”—young academic coaches who do whatever is needed to remove the various barriers that stand between Learning Works’ students and their education. Sometimes this means pounding on a truant student’s door until he or she wakes up, gets dressed and sheepishly follows the Chaser into the car and to the school. Other times it means picking up homework, or helping a student deal with a court case or driving him or her home from the hospital—or from juvenile hall. Sometimes it means just listening to a litany of fear and guilt and trauma and sorrow—so that eventually the hope that lies underneath may emerge.

Rahn started the school after working for Pasadena Unified in that district’s dropout re-enrollment program. When she became frustrated by the difficulties of getting get the district to employ strategies she felt would truly work, she decided to create a non-district school that had the flexibility to meet the dropped-out students needs.

On Monday and Tuesday of this week, KPCC education reporter (and pal) Adofo Guzman Lopez ran a terrific two-part story on Learning Works, Rhan, and the Chasers—which you can find here and here.

“The number one binding force though of dropouts is poverty,” Rahn told Lopez.

“We really see ourselves as a laboratory of poverty because every student that I look at is really living some condition of that. They’ve been living independently for years. Whether it’s that the parents don’t exist or in essence the parent lost control years ago.”

In the second of the two broadcasts, Lopez went along with two of Learning Works’ Chasers, Dominic Correy and Carlos Cruz.

Their first stop was to drop off homework for an 18-year-old who’d ignored her studies the last several months. Correy talks to her in a comfortable street tone. “Hi Lawanda, how are you doing today? You got a job? When do you get your first check? You taking us out to eat?”

That tone turned to one that balanced coercion and compassion. “Don’t use work as an excuse on why you not going to come in and why you going to finish your work. You know I love you and we’ve been through everything ‘Wana.”

Chasing involves picking up and dropping off homework, and taking students to court dates and mental health appointments. The idea is to help students overcome the obstacles to finishing high school.

At their next stop, the chasers found evidence that some students have given up trying to jump those hurdles. The student hadn’t shown up to school in a month. Cruz said the boy’s father is in jail and his grandfather was recently diagnosed with cancer. Correy knocks on the door with authority. “Chris, I know you’re in there, man, open up.”

When Cruz called the teenager on his cell phone, the student said he was in Altadena. Cruz didn’t spare any time holding the teen to account for not showing up to school. “I’ve been stalking you for a whole month straight, never answer your phone. You said you were going to have some work done, then when I text you, you don’t answer. What’s up with you, man?”

(By the way, Tokofsky helps by planning inventive learning labs and field trips for the students. For example, last semester he took a group to meet and hang out with a three-judge panel from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, including the court’s Chief Judge Alex Kozinski—a field trip that my grad students would have jumped at. “And they totally loved it,” said Tokofsky.)

GANG INTERVENTION BY ANOTHER NAME

The out-of-the-ordinary approach seems effective.

Right now, Learning Works has 291 students enrolled —nearly all students who otherwise might attend no school at all—and that number is climbing. It operates on a yearly budget of $1.8 million, or $6,200 per student per school year—far less than even the most budget-challenged LAUSD high school. (And, by contrast, an affluent district like Beverly Hills spends nearly $13,000 per student.)

This spring Learning Works staged a graduation ceremony at Pasadena City Hall where the school’s initial class of 44 students collected diplomas, many the first in their family to have graduated high school.

In March, they will partner with Homeboy Industries to open a satellite school inside Homeboy’s office and bakery building in downtown LA.

Rahn thinks the partnership will be a natural fit. “A lot of what the chasers do,’ she said when we talked on Tuesday, is gang intervention by another name. “But it’s intervention with a goal, which is a diploma. I think that’s the point. We don’t just ask them to move away from gangs, we give them something to move toward, which is an education. Homeboy does that with jobs.”

And how does Learning Works get its students?

It’s easy,” Rahn said. “They find us.” She laughed. “The poverty population networks are alive and well. And when word gets around that there’s a place where kids can get help and not be judged….believe me, they come out in droves.”

(Photo by Dominic Correy.)

1. HIATUS

WitnessLA and I will be on hiatus until next Monday, Jan. 4, in order that I may spend some much-needed time focusing on a personal writing project.

From time to time during the week, I will likely put up mini posts. And I’ll tweet whenvever the spirit moves. And if something truly unignorable happens, I’ll reappear. But mostly I’ll be hiding out.

(Feel free to keep up the conversation in the interim, though. )

2. ANDRE BIROTTE SELECTED AS U.S. ATTORNEY: WOOO-HOOO!

It was announced late last week that Andre Birotte Jr., who for the last six years has served as the Los Angeles Police Department’s inspector general, has been tapped by President Obama to become the top-of-the-heap federal prosecutor in Los Angeles—AKA the new U.S. Attorney. This fact has had me cheering loudly all weekend.

(Okay, part of the cheering might have been a result of those Stoli and ginger beer drinks my niece-in-law was mixing on Christmas eve. But most of it was because of the news that Andre Birotte was, indeed, as many of us had hoped, the official U.S attorney nominee.)

Congressman Bobby Scott’s Youth Promise Act, is one of those rare species of legislation: A well written bill. More than that, it’s a well written bill having to do with gang violence reduction, which makes it about as usual as a verified Yeti sighting.

And it’s picking up steam. Over half the members of the U.S. House – 234 Congress members- have signed on as co-sponsors of Scott’s bill.

But, as the Virginia-Pilot reports, there are still naysayers who favor more of the kind of get-tough policies that have not proven to be effective in the past. (Read the article. The V-Pilot does a nice job.)

4. HOMEBOY INDUSTRIES IN THE SLUMS OF ALABAMA

For the third year in a row, Homeboy Industries has sent some of its former homeboy staff to Pritchard, Alabama, to work with young gang members and wannabees in this poorest of communities.

The LA Times’ Katy Newton has produced a stunningly good multimedia package on the trip and some of the personalities.

It is really, really worth your time to watch.

Then, after you finish with the video, click on the essay written by Trayvon Earl Jeffers, a tall, gangly former homeboy with a smile as big as the world who was among the Homeboy group who originally went to Alabama.

Then click on the Homicide Report’s account of Trayvon’s murder.

UPDATE:

4. IDIOTIC FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT DRIVES AWAY GOOD COPS.

Okay, one more important read I had to add. Joel Rubin and Scott Gold have the story.

Monday night the news was startling. Alex Sanchez’s attorney Kerry Bensinger learned that US District Court Judge Manuel Real had been taken off the case.

Tom Hayden quickly wrote up the news for The Nation. Here is how his report opened:

The gang conspiracy case against Alex Sanchez was transferred to the jurisdiction of a new federal judge today after weeks of community protest alleging bias by Judge Manuel Real. The decision was rendered by a judicial status conference in a closed chamber December 2. Supporters of Alex Sanchez saw the ruling as a major change for the better.

After weeks of protests alleging judicial bias, the gang conspiracy case against Alex Sanchez was transferred to the jurisdiction of a new federal judge.

The new judge assigned to the case is Judge Christina Snyder, 61, appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 on the recommendation of California senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer. Judge Snyder is a Pomona College alumna (1969) and a Stanford Law School graduate (1972). In an important recent decision, she ruled against California state Medicare cuts in 2008. Little is known about her approach to juvenile justice or police reform issues. She was in private practice for twenty-five years before her appointment to the federal bench.

Alex Sanchez supporters were thrilled.

Certainly the change in judges in no way suggested whether or not legal events would play out in Alex’s favor. But supporters felt it would mean a trial that would hopefully be fair—an outcome that many even outside the Sanchez camp had increasingly come to question should the proceedings stay in Judge Real’s courtroom.

The order to transfer the Sanchez case from Judge Real—which also contained a concurring signature of the new Judge, Christina Snyder, signed Dec. 2—- was filed on December 4, and then reportedly sent to Sanchez’ defense lawyer at 3:07 Monday afternoon.

Then a couple hours later on Tuesday afternoon…..everything changed.

Sanchez’s attorney received a new email, this time from the government prosecutor. Judge Real’s clerk said that Real wanted to keep the case and that Judge Snyder’s signature was “a mistake.”

Hayden sent around an email Tuesday night containing details and reactions. It read in part:

“The turn of events will raise new suspicions about alleged manipulation of the proceedings which began six months ago with Sanchez’ arrest on gang conspiracy charges. Sanchez, a well-known gang intervention worker who helped expose the Los Angeles police Rampart scandal a decade ago, asserts his innocence in the case. He is being held without bail at a federal prison in Los Angeles.

As of 4:30 Tuesday afternoon, no order reversing the transfer had been received by defense counsel, and no explanation offered for the unusual chain of events.

The order surprised and pleased the Sanchez defense team. His supporters, organized as www.wearealex.org, assert that Sanchez is being railroaded and denied any semblance of a fair trial. Sanchez’ court-appointed counsel, Kerry Bensinger, argued in a recent appeal to the Ninth Circuit that the case should be remanded to another judge.

Why the December 4 transfer order was withdrawn less than a day after it was made public will raise questions about the inner workings of the judiciary itself.

Uh, huh. Something like that.

Or to put it another way: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot???!!

When all the gang intervention dollars were gathered under the single roof of the mayor’s office two years ago, there were several promises made by then Gang Czar Jeff Carr, to make sure the money was spent wisely.

One promise was to train and professionalize the so-called hard core interventionists who were were being given city funds.

(Another promise was to have full, transparent and competent evaluations of all the city’s gang prevention and intervention programs—and to have them from the programs’ inception. But that is a topic that must wait for another day.)

Reporter Scott Gold has addressed the training issue—or lack thereof—in Thursday’s LA Times. And he has done so very well.

He reports, among other findings, that the training that was supposed to have taken place a year ago, just ain’t happened. And he looks at the squabbling and the politics that have prevented its launch.

It’s an article worth reading.

But before you begin, here is a bit of info on the main players mentioned:

You know who Connie Rice is, of course. She’s a long time civil rights attorney and public policy expert who as the co-founder and co-director of LA’s Advancement Project has, in the last few years, has turned her attention to gangs.

Connie is also one of the smartest people in Los Angeles.

But Aquil Basheer is a remarkable man who brings to the table his own set of formidable talents.—plus thirty years of street experience as a community organizer, mentor, martial arts trainer and street intervention and threat analysis expert. (And in an interesting side note, Aquil’s father was LA’s first African American firefighter.)

Okay, now here’s the opening:

A city-sponsored training academy for gang intervention workers will open at least a year later than Los Angeles officials had hoped after a collision of philosophies and egos — a hitch in the city’s effort to modernize its campaign against street violence.

Officials said this week that an independent panel has selected the Advancement Project, the legal advocacy, civil rights and public policy group, as the winner of a bidding process to run the academy.

But that bid was never supposed to take place. The city’s original plan – to meld the best practices of two gang intervention programs into an “official” curriculum — collapsed, according to interviews with city officials and City Hall advisors.

Now, the academy isn’t expected to open until at least the spring of 2010 – a year later than originally envisioned. And it’s not over yet: The head of a group that lost the bid called the selection process flawed and pledged to appeal the decision into next year, when the City Council will be asked to sign off on the contract.

The dispute might seem like insider politics, considering that the contract is worth just $200,000 the first year, with a possibility of $800,000 over four years. But it means the continuation of the status quo: scores of interventionists fanned out across the city, some skilled and relied upon by law enforcement, but many unregulated, untrained and operating off the books amid dangerous crosscurrents of street politics.

Read the rest of this entry »

THE MATTER OF JUDGE MANUEL L. REAL

His reversal rate is estimated to be 10 times the average for sitting federal judges.

He has had ten cases outright snatched away from him by appeals courts.

In 2006, there was serious talk of impeaching him.

The Judicial Council of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has examined 89 cases in which his conduct was challenged.

He has been exhibit A in the ongoing discussion about whether federal judges need better oversight.

Now, this past Friday, U.S. Judge Manuel Real was sharply rebuked by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for his bizarre and unaccountably high-handed handling of yet another case.

While he has his supporters, he has a long list of critics, including a string of prominent attorneys and some legal scholars have said publicly that, if Judge Real takes a dislike to one’s case or one’s client, it is extreme difficult to get a fair trial in his court.

Having observed his behavior twice close-up during the last two bail hearings for Alex Sanchez, I can fully understand the concern about his impartiality. It is not that he is overly conservative or overly liberal on the law. It is more that he seems often to make up his mind on things whimsically, facts and due process be damned, and then will skew the proceedings to match his personal view—all of which is pretty much what his critics describe as well.

U.S. District Court judges, like Real, are appointed for life, as a way of protecting judicial independence. It takes just short of an act of God to remove them, an arrangement that also has its distinct downsides.

As it stands now, Judge Manuel Real will be the one to preside over Sanchez’ trial.

In the meantime, Alex Sanchez’ attorney has filed an appeal with the 9th Circuit of Real’s decision not to grant Sanchez bail.

CHARLIE BECK’S AH-HA MOMENT

Joel Rubin has an interesting and thoughtful story in Sunday’s LA Times about the evolution of soon-to-be LAPD Chief Charlie Beck’s view of policing. Some of it we already know, some is new. But Rubin has re-contextualized the facts of Beck’s philosophic journey in a way that makes for a good an informative read.

NOTE: In a separate story, the Times also reports on some old unproved allegations of mismanagement when he was a board member of the Los Angeles Police Relief Association.

OHIO’S (AND TED STRICKLAND’S) CLEMENCY PROBLEM

According to the Columbus Dispatch, Governor Ted Strickland has 712 pending clemency applications sitting on his desk (metaphorically speaking. I am assuming all 712 aren’t, literally on his desk). Some date back to 2005.

The problem is not that Governor Strickland turns down clemency requests with great abandon (or that he grants them with that same abandon). The problem is that the governor of Ohio does nothing. He just lets the requests sit. And sit.

As its case in point, the Dispatch cites the story of a former business man with no previous adult criminal record, now a prisoner for a decade, Bradley Tapp, whom the Ohio parole board recently unanimously recommended for release. The board also recommended Tapp for executive clemency in 2008. Even the judge who sentenced Tapp to fourteen years in prison for his angry, drunken, violent assault on two neighbors in 1999, has signed an affidavit saying his own decision was too harsh.

Anyway, whatever the merits, or lack thereof of each individual case, one cannot help but wonder why Strickland continues to fail to make decisions on these 712 lives.

ONLY DISCONNECT: ONE MAN’S TALE OF DIGITAL HUNTER-GATHERING

This essay isn’t in the least social justice-y. But it was in Sunday’s NY times Magazine, and it’s very smart and funny and you should read it. (Really.)

It’s about giving up one’s Internet connection. Sort of. It is written by one of my Bennington pals, Wyatt Mason, who is ridiculously brainy, but who also (thankfully) has a silly side.

GRANDSTANDING OVER BLOCKING HELP FOR VETS WITH LONG TERM HEALTH CARE NEEDS

The first paragraph of Monday’s NY Times Op Ed explains the issue very plainly.

A creative plan to help wounded veterans and their exhausted families adapt to the strain of long-term home care is on the brink of bipartisan approval — but for the familiar obstructionism of Senator Tom Coburn. This is one of the most deplorable displays by the lawmaker-physician, an Oklahoma Republican who relishes playing the self-styled budget hawk by putting attention-grabbing holds on crucial legislation.

Read the rest.

MEDICAL MARIJUANA—GOOD SENSE AND NONSENSE

Today, Monday, a joint session of the City Council’s Public Safety and Planning and Land
Use committees will talk over (likely endlessly, if the past is any bellwether) an ordinance that would outlaw most of the medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles.

Under the proposed ordinance, medical marijuana “collectives’‘ would be allowed to grow pot for members with serious illnesses, but could not sell marijuana for a profit, and collectives could have no more than five pounds of dried pot or 100 plants at any given time.

MEANWHILE, in West Hollywood, reports the LA Times’ John Hoeffell, the We Ho city council has been rigorously and appropriately regulating marijuana dispensaries for years, and everything has worked out fine for all concerned without the kind of draconian restrictions the LA City Council is now about to contemplate.

PHOTO NOTE: All the roses in these occasional “Fresh picks’ or “Monday picks’ photos are taken in my garden. In the case, the rose is a classic yellow tea called Midas Touch

1.

The final bail hearing for Alex Sanchez began around 1:40 p.m. on Monday, October 18.

Every bench in courtroom on the second floor of the federal court on Spring Street was packed to the point of slight discomfort for the audience, with several reasonably prominent people turned away altogether because they came too late.

After Judge Manual L. Real opened the proceedings, he told Sanchez’s attorney, Kerry Bensinger, to speak first. Bensinger is a tall, fit, affable, very smart man and a skilled researcher who is court appointed, but has spent an astonishing amount of time on this case already.* His courtroom manner, however, while calm and intelligent, has thus far lacked the aggressiveness that he and his client may need.

And then there is U.S. District Court Judge Manual Real. Appointed in 1966 by Lyndon Johnson, at 85, Judge Real is what we used to call a character. He has spent 43 years on the same bench and projects an image that combines the demeanor of an irascible uncle who mutters loudly and tyrannically over his soup at Thanksgiving dinner, with that of a glowering bird of prey.

2.

Bensinger told the judge that he would like to call to the stand Father Greg Boyle. The intention was to have the priest (who is frequently called as an expert witness in both state and federal trials) talk about the elements of the four wiretap conversations central to the prosecution’s case that he noted were discrepant from what the feds had said was on the recordings. Most importantly, Boyle would speak about the crucial section about Sanchez no longer being an active gang member that the prosecution had conveniently omitted from their filing. [Details here.]

It promised to be an interesting testimony.

On the way to the hearing I spoke to Greg about the four recordings and asked him if there was anything in the conversations that he thought was incriminating. “All the time I was listening, I kept bracing myself,” he said. “But it never came. There really isn’t anything.”

In an earlier hearing, the prosecution had called their own expert witness—LAPD detective Frank Flores—to characterize what was on the recordings. Attorneys in the audience assumed that Judge Real would permit Greg to take the stand in order to level the playing field.

Attorneys in the audience were wrong.

He did not need to hear from Father Greg, Judge Real shouted. (And when I say shouted, I am not being hyperbolic.) “It is not his interpretation that is important! It is that of the court!”

Bensinger tried to explain about the importance of the missing section that he said directly disputed the prosecution’s claim that Sanchez was an active gang member and a shot caller. But Judge Real was no longer listening. “That’s a matter for trial! Tri-al, counselor, don’t you understand?!”

3.

Bensinger said he had another witness he intended to call, a woman who runs a prominent gang tattoo removal agency in LA County. Bensinger wanted her to rebut the prosecution’s earlier contention that, although Sanchez had all his visible gang tattoos removed, the fact that he still had one left on his chest proved that he was still an active gang member.

Real shouted down that idea too.

“She’s not competent to say anything one way or the other!” he roared.

The only thing that Judge Real would allow from Bensinger’s prepared presentation, was the cross examination of Det. Frank Flores. This basically meant that the prosecution was able to present a witness and multiple pieces of evidence–exhibits— to “prove” why Sanchez was an active gangster and flight risk, while the defense was allowed no countering witnesses, and no countering exhibits.

With a sigh, Bensinger proceeded.

Bensinger asked Detective Flores why he didn’t include the missing material about Sanchez not being an active gang member in his own court filing. [See previous post for details] Flores said he didn’t think it was important. Kerry pressed that point and Flores said that Camaron—the nickname of the now-dead El Salvadoran MS-13 gangster who made the remarks —was speaking “tongue in cheek.”

At this, there was audible muttering from the crowd. “So Cameron was a post modern gangster who was speaking ironically?” someone near to me whispered.

4.

It was Bensinger’s contention that Sanchez threatened no one, and ordered no hits. To the contrary, said Bensinger, Sanchez was on the four calls in question to try to diffuse a situation in which several people—Sanchez prominently included—had been accused of being FBI informants. Because of this accusation, a Salvadoran gangtser with the nickname Cameron had caused a “green light” to be put on Sanchez and others. In other words, Cameron had ordered a hit on a number of people, including Sanchez. And Sanchez was trying use his contacts and personal influence to defuse what had become a volatile situation.

The issue of the FBI informant rumor and the “green light” are not in depute. What is in dispute and, based on the transcripts, open to interpretation, is what Alex Sanchez did about the threat.

5.

One of the issues that Bensinger brought up during the cross examination was his contention that Flores completely and crucially misidentified a person on one of the calls, a guy with the street name of Zombie. According to Flores, the person, “Zombie,” on the phone call was also the person who was eventually arrested for the murder of Cameron, a murder that Sanchez had allegedly ordered during the last of the four phone calls that are the center of the prosecution’s case.

Yet, according to Bensinger, the guy called “Zombie” on the call was a very different fellow from Juan Bonilla, the killer, who is also called Zombie.

(I know this nickname business is dizzying, but try to stay with me here.)

Read the rest of this entry »

UPDATE: No Bail. Not shocked. Much drama. Judge Real is….an intriguing character, shall we say. More in a while.

Right now, however, I’m getting ready to be on KNBC’s The Filter with Fred Roggin. (More about that in a while too. You can watch me live at 7:30 p.m. on digital 4.2 or right here.)

The next—and presumably the final—bail hearing for Alex Sanchez will be held today at 1:30 p.m. at the downtown federal courthouse on Spring Street, with Federal Judge Manuel L. Real presiding.

The hearing should be dramatic on a multiplicity of levels. For one thing, Judge Real has asked to hear the recordings of the wiretapped conversations on which the FBI has purportedly built its case.

Yet, the most dramatic moment could come when Sanchez’s attorney, Kerry Bensinger, presents some brand new information to the court.

It is information that has at least the potential to be a game changer.

It is also information that, without an excellent explanation, could blow a substantial hole in the prosecution’s credibility.

FIRST LET’S RECAP THE BACK STORY: Alex Sanchez is the El Salvadoran-born, former MS-13 gang member who transformed his life to become a nationally respected gang intervention leader. Sanchez founded and is the executive director of Homies Unidos, and has been praised in cities across the country as someone who has helped turn around the lives of many, many young men and women.

Then this past June, Alex was arrested by the FBI as part of a federal racketeering indictment and accused of plotting the murder of another gang member among other charges. It was not that the Feds accused Sanchez of shooting anyone himself, or personally dealing in drugs and guns. Worse, the indictment maintained that Sanchez is a shot caller—AKA a leader—of a particular clique of MS-13 who ordered such things done. He was, said the Feds, leading a double life and had successfully pulled the moral and psychological wool over the eyes of his myriad friends, admirers and supporters.

Although prosecutors say they have informants who paint Sanchez as a shot caller, the heart of the case is based on four wiretap conversations. the transcripts of which many law enforcement experts—like D.C. based organized crime and terrorism maven, Tom Diaz—considered to be quite damning.

The conversations are in Spanish, and many of the most significant statements in the recordings are ambiguous and/or couched in colloquial gang argot. As a consequence, in addition to the Spanish/English translation, they also required a sort of gangster cultural interpretation in order to determine how damning the recordings actually were. The latter interpretation was provided by LAPD Detective Frank Flores who is considered to be one of the department’s resident experts on Mara Salvatrucha, MS-13. It was Flores’ conclusion that, without a doubt, Sanchez was a dangerous shot caller who had ordered a murder.

Observers like like D.C. based organized crime and terrorism maven, Tom Diaz found the transcripts quite damning. Diaz, who knows several law enforcement sources close to the case, and is himself an attorney, gives his interpretation of the transcripts here.

In short, it seemed that things were looking grim for Alex Sanchez.

THEN THIS PAST WEDNESDAY, AN INTERESTING THING HAPPENED: Sanchez’s lawyer, Kerry Bensinger filed with the court a new formal statement by Homeboy Industries founder and director Father Greg Boyle on behalf of Alex Sanchez.

The statement came about after Kerry gave Father Greg and some others the transcripts of the wiretap conversations. The idea was that they would read the lengthy things and give their opinions on what they read.

Several who read the material, like Tom Hayden, admittedly a strong Sanchez supporter, felt that, counter to what Flores and the Feds said, the 1500 pages of transcript backed Sanchez’s claims of innocence.

But, as a fluent Spanish speaker and a gang expert of nearly a quarter century duration, Greg Boyle went much further. He didn’t just review the English translations and Detective Flores’s interpretations, he went upstream and listened to, analyzed—and, in some crucial sections, re-translated—the underlying recordings themselves.

This yielded some intriguing results.

I talked to Greg yesterday, and he told me that, when he listened to the raw recordings, his analysis of what was said varied substantially from what the FBI’s translations combined with the analysis of LAPD Detective Flores had concluded.

But that isn’t the most important part of what he found. In reviewing the recordings, Fr. Greg also notice that that there was one significant section of the conversation that the feds and the LAPD had curiously left completely off the transcript—an omission that basically tosses a live grenade smack in the middle of the Fed’s case against Sanchez.

Here’s how Tom Diaz put it. (It was Tom who first alerted me to the filing):

Father Boyle points out a troubling omission from the transcript in the government’s case — namely, the statement of one of the gangster’s that pretty clearly appears to say (in so many words) “butt out, Alex, you are no longer one of us.”

….If you indict Mother Teresa, you better be able to prove her guilt slam dunk style.

[SNIP]

No doubt, the government will have an answer [to the filing].... If it does not have a zippy and persuasive reply to the following, you won’t be able to count the ruined careers on all your hands and toes.

Here is the relevant part of Greg’s statement. [Declaration of Father Greg Boyle Filed in Support of Defendant Sanchez's Application for Review of Detention Order, United States v. Alfaro, United States District Court for the Central District of California, Docket No. CR-09-00466-R-22.]

Read the rest of this entry »