Comments on: Trutanich, Taggers & the Madness of Bad Injunctions

By: NOYSER CBA TNE TSB

NOYSER CBA TNE TSB — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:46:12 +0000

YAH IT’S ALL ABOUT GAFF I WAS STAYING IN SOUTH CENTRO BUT I DID DAMAGE FOR ALOT OF YEARS I GOT FEAD UP SEEN MY SELF SO KNOW I MOVE TO NEW MEXICO TO FUCK IT UP LOOK OUT FOR YOUR BOY NOYSE NOYSER RUIDO SAME SHIT BUT DEFERENT STILE FUCK ALL YOU FUCKERS THAT TALK ABOUT O MY BUILDING GOT TAG SO WHAT FUCK IT AND LIVE WITH IT PUTOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS:.

By: Craig Wilson

Craig Wilson — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 21:30:32 +0000

I am 57, grew up in so central LA. I never was mistaken for a gangster, never spray painted any words or Art on pvt or public property. I never had the urge to tatoo my entire body or any part of it. My point is, don’t “hang Out”, dont stand around at the liquor store, DO study, do learn English, do take advantage of all the oppty in America. The police will leave you alone if you don’t look like a killer or psycho. Do play sports, or lift wts, do something to improve yourself. I went to college, BA Math, then enlisted in the USMC. Do something to improve your life. do not destroy other people’s property. Some day you will own a home or business.You will not like taggers.

By: O.K.

O.K. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 03:18:39 +0000

That’s right!

By: NO B.S.

NO B.S. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 01:52:47 +0000

Look… the only tagger crew that actually became a real, full fledged, “street gang” (of concern) was KAM13. They where such a concern that in fact they were the first street gang to get a Gang Injunction in Boyle Heights, even before all the other (& older) street gangs of East L.A. This was because they took over the narcotic trade in their neighborhood and the way they did it, not for GRAFFITI. Remember, KAM13- (the only tagging crew to ACTUALLY become a real street gang)- converted into a gang in the early 1990’s. “No other crew has since been such a concern”.
Realistically, One can-not compare “KCC OR NTS” ect… with KAM13. So we more than likely will never see another tagger crew get out of hand, like KAM13 did. Come-on… this is 2010 (just about). Those early 90’s taggers, that became gangsters, are mostly dead, crippled, or doing life in prison. Believe me… these new 2010 tagger kids are not like before. These are new times we’re in. The worst is gone with the 90’s. Actually, if you take a good look around and think about it, you’ll see that most youths today are being “positively” influenced by the few survivors, of the L.A. 1990′S (Their parents, uncles, big brothers, hip-hop artist, ect…). They seem to be more articulate than the generation before them. They seem to just want to have fun and express their optimism, where-as taggers of the 90’s were crying-out their pessimism.
As a society, We should accept some-kind of teenage rebellious expression… And why-not a little FORBIDDEN-ART? What do you expect? Vandalism has been an American tradition (for teenage rebels) since before “Trutanich” (by-the-way, that name would be a cool tagger name) was even thought-of. I say we should nurture this. Because thanks to the few survivors of the 90’s, we have all this great fashion, and art, being projected through every type of modern media. Doesn’t that designer t-shirt you have on makes you feel alive in this dead economy? A lot of good actually came out of graffity art… at least to designing and marketing corporations, hense… all of us.
LET’S NOT GIVE UP ANOTHER CIVIL LIBERTY JUST FOR A POLITICAL-PUBLICITY-STUNT, which of course… only targets us minorities. Trutanich, your reasoning must be more clouded then Delgadio’s.

By: Sure Fire

Sure Fire — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:48:11 +0000

I agree with Kelvin’s take but Poplockerone knows what he’s talking about. I would much rather have snagged a felon any day than some tagger. However, it’s all relative to taking criminals off the street and making the community more a place to raise a family than now.

I never thought of how taggers would be jumped into established gangs but it makes sense. So in fact dealing with these guys, based on numbers alone and the real possibility they will end up in hard core gangs makes sense doesn’t it?

By: Kelvin

Kelvin — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:58:02 +0000

The point or points Poplockerone made seems to be 1) KAM 13 and the other tagging crews mentioned exemplify an inevitable transition from vandalism to fully fledged criminal street gangs. I don’t disagree, indeed that is the point and the very reason why enjoining nascent gangs is both constitutional and part of the solution.

2) LAPD’s “good investigators … wish not to deal with taggers or vandalism related crimes,” is another part of the problem. Since when did we allow LAPD to pick and choose what crimes to investigate? Anyone who pays taxes in LA has a right to expect the police to enforce the law. Of course, it’s far more attractive for cops to arrest fully fledged felons, than spotty faced teens committing misdemeanors. The point made by Poplockerone seems to be that it’s better to wait until a tagging crew becomes a serious criminal threat before wasting their time on crime prevention. I do not agree.

As for the way out of gang injunctions, I’m not saying that the 8,000 who are subject to injunctions are not qualified to apply. I am saying that the way out of an injunction is to apply. How many have applied and what is the status of their applications? By all means find out what the score is when your contact at the City Attorney’s office is back. I think we would all like to know if there’s a problem here.

By: Celeste Fremon

Celeste Fremon — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:41:07 +0000

Poplockerone said it all very succinctly—better than I would have.

As for those who have been able to jump through the necessary hoops to get off the gang list and out of the injunctions, last time I asked, one has done it successfully.

The problem, as I have written about before here and here…

http://witnessla.com/gangs/2008/admin/getting-off-the-gang-listfinally/

http://witnessla.com/police/2007/admin/okay-so-wheres-that-promised-exit-ramp/

….is this off-ramp isn’t yet really all that functional. I know the City Attorney’s office genuinely intends to make it MORE functional, which is great, and I don’t know what their progress is on that yet.

Are you saying that all 8000 are so gang involved that they don’t qualify? If so, you’re uninformed. See my examples.

In any case, the person in the CA’s office with the best access to any recent figures is out of the office for a few days.

But, Kelvin, I’m not sure I get your point. This isn’t about gang injunctions. I don’t have a specific argument with any particular gang injunction or I would have made it (as I did when I wrote about the idiotic and ill planned OVC injunction out in Orange County back in May).

By: poplockerone

poplockerone — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:58:25 +0000

I’m oppose to the entire idea – it will do nothing to lower vandalism related crime.
Gang injunctions work well for gangs but it will do nothing to solve the vandalism problem in LA. This is all a political horseshit stunt to make a group of politicians and certain influential citizens happy.
Your views and outline on KAM13 are incorrect…..they were not trying to establish themselves as a tagging crew. KAM13 was already a full blown out sureno gang and they were vandalizing – not tagging to establish themselves as a credible south sider gang in Boyle Heights. KAM13 had no original orgin or terrority to claim – so they created one.
Today, many tagging crews that have grown in great numbers – will eventually get threats from the Mexican Mafia to drop the markers and switch over their focus to a sureno gang.
KAM13 like KCC13 NTS13 and many other tagging crews that have either converted over or have been completely engulfed as a clique to the dominating gang in their area – its either by force or by agreement – but its going to happen.
All these tagging crews that are borderline gangs – will hold a meeting with members and advised that the crew is turning over – you have a choice – leave it or jump on the bandwagon and bang the 13.
I can give everyone a good outline – history and credible concrete rebuttals to why this tagging injunction wont work….I just really dont have the time right now.
Plus, Los Angeles has many other more important critical criminal issues than dealing with taggers.
The problem is that all the good investigators (those that know the streets) wish not to deal with taggers or vandalism related crimes. They have stolen guns to recover and murder suspects to catch.

By: Kelvin

Kelvin — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:25:28 +0000

The initial reaction to Trutanich’s tagging crew injunction is understandably extreme on both sides. On the one hand, those who have seen our city blighted by spray painted initials, such as “KAM 13″ are encouraged at the prospect of seeing those responsible for the millions of dollars it costs to clean up their vandalism, punished. On the other side, others sees this as some sort of over reaction that will unconstitutionally inhibit youthful congregation.

So let’s get a few facts straight here. First of all, “tagging” is a crime – it’s called vandalism, defined in Penal Code Section 594 as “defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.” It is not protected speech under the 1st Amendment, that is well settled law.

Second, in order for anyone to be the subject of an injunction, they must have a prior criminal conviction for a crime, in this case 594PC.

Third, that prior conviction for 594PC has to be one where the graffiti was not simply an individual’s initials, name or proclamation of a youthful crush, but something where the graffiti was a representative of an association of individuals who “deface with graffiti or other inscribed material.” An example of this form of vandalism was “KAM 13″ which, for those of your readers unfortunate enough to live in Boyle Heights will recall, was sprayed relentlessly around the neighborhood as this group of taggers sought to establish their identity as a tagging crew. KAM 13 evolved into a fully fledged criminal street gang when violent conflicts with other tagging crews resulted in gunfire rather than spray paint.

See: http://www.streetgangs.com/hispanic/kambarrio.html

Fourth, much to the chagrin of the ACLU who leapt into this debate feet first without choosing to educate the public of the rigors of how injunctive relief is obtained, an injunction is not a fiat or law proposed by the City Attorney. It is something issued by a judge after a hearing where the evidence has to prove that there is a group of individuals identified by their prior convictions for 594PC, who continually commit this crime in the name of their particular group; such as “KAM 13.”

Fifth, if a judge were convinced that the evidence proves that identifiable convicted individuals who associate for the purpose of committing acts of vandalism should be prevented from associating with each other, then before that injunction becomes effective, those individuals have to be served with the injunction. They have to be told that they cannot associate with their fellow convicts.

The fact that an injunction is only issued after a hearing and presentation of evidence before a judge is one of the reasons why the ACLU has failed to show that injunctions are unconstitutional, and shows that their comment on this latest proposed injunction is disingenuous and inflammatory.

Celeste, while I have a great deal of respect for you and your ideals( many of which I share), I wonder if after reading this you have a different opinion? It will not be the case that kids will be summarily scooped up and arrested for hanging out. They have to be kids who are 1) already convicted of PC594, and 2) the prior act of 594PC had to have been one where the object of the vandalism can be shown to be promotion of the “tagging crew,” not merely youthful exuberance.

I think we all remember the case of “Zoner” the idiot who tagged the MTA bus while the Mayor was doing a photo op. He ultimately re-offended despite the Mayor’s counsel. But he never could have been the subject of an injunction because he acted alone. The terms of his probation were all that could be imposed on him.

Finally, you took a jab at Trutanich for not “dialing back some of the injunctions as no longer needed.” You rightly state that there are currently 43 injunctions in place and, yes, none have been quashed. Those 43 injunctions effect approximately 8,000 identified gang members.

That’s 8,000 out of the approximately 40,000 identified gang members in the City of Los Angeles. Each and every one of those 8,000 enjoined gang members can apply to have the terms of the injunction lifted. It’s no secret. Father Boyle knows all about it. So if a person feels that they should not be enjoined, they have a way out. All they have to do is ask and show that they’re no longer involved in the gang lifestyle, that they’ve turned their lives around, and they’re trying to live that same way your or I do. That the terms of their injunction should be “dialed back,” to use your terminology.

So, Celeste, why don’t you contact Trutanich and ask him how many of the 8,000 have applied to have their injunctions quashed? Ask him how many have had their wish granted. Ask him, don’t speculate.

After you’ve had that discussion, please tell us that you’re still convinced that tagging crews should not be the subject of an injunction, and please tell us how many gang members want to have their injunctions dialed back.

By: John Moore

John Moore — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:04:08 +0000

Agreed, Celeste. This is way overboard. Vandalism is all it is, and since it is not gang related, it doesn’t require a drastic solution.

Personally, I find some taggers to be pretty good. I have fantasized owning a box car or two and having some good taggers paint them.

Of course, then the others, since too many taggers have no respect for anything, would paint over it.

Oh well.