Yesterday, Los Angeles gang intervention leader Alex Sanchez had his bail hearing at the US District Court on Spring Street in downtown Los Angeles.
The drama that played itself out in the 8th floor hearing room of the US District Court building was both informative and disturbing.
As you’ll remember, Alex Sanchez is a former MS-13 gang member who turned his life around in the mid-1990s and now serves as the executive director of the non-profit, Homies Unidos. He is highly regarded in Los Angeles for the work he has done in helping others reclaim their own lives, and for persuading school kids to stay out of gangs altogether. Sanchez has won multiple awards, and has been lauded nationally as a peacemaker and a role model.
Then last week Alex Sanchez was arrested by the FBI on Federal racketeering charges. The Feds allege that 37-year-old Sanchez has been living a double life and is in fact the shot-caller for the Normandie clique of the infamous Mara Salvatrucha and that he was involved in a conspiracy to have a rival gang member killed in El Salvador in 2006. Prosecutor Elizabeth Carpenter announced that if Sanchez is found guilty he would receive a life sentence without possibility of parole.
AT THE COURTHOUSE
Although family, friends and supporters were firm in their insistence that Alex was innocent, everyone gathered at the courthouse assumed that the Federal prosecutor would ask for a high bail due to the seriousness of the charges.
In an effort to get the bail reduced—or better yet, to persuade the judge to release Alex on home arrest—Sanchez’ attorney’, Kerry Bensinger, made an impassioned pitch.
In 20 years of law practice, Bensinger told U.S. Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg, “I’ve never seen such an outpouring of support for a client.”
Indeed, only about one third of the 100 or more family and friends who turned up for the hearing were able to jam themselves into the room. The rest were asked to wait in the small park across from the court, where a press conference was scheduled to be held, post hearing.
Among those who made it inside the hearing were Michael de la Rocha, deputy to City Council member Tony Cardenas, former state senator Tom Hayden and Minister Tony Muhammad of the Nation of Islam, who was accompanied by a couple of his bow-tie-wearing Fruit of Islam body guards.
Author/poet Luis Rodriguez also made it inside the hearing room but civil rights lawyer Jorge Gonzales arrived late so waited patiently outside.
The Reverend Cecil Murray, former pastor of the First AME Church, sent a statement. Father Greg Boyle, who was out of town, sent a fellow priest to read an even lengthier statement.
Attorney Bensinger read excerpts from 110 additional letters that he said were from clergy, academics, university professors, a few politicos and a pile of professionals.
There was even a strongly worded letter of support from a former FBI guy named Tom Parker who used to be the assistant special agent in charge of the F.B.I.’s Los Angeles Bureau. Parker too was at the hearing.
“In my experience, when someone is arrested people start to distance themselves from that individual,” Bensinger said. “The opposite has occurred here.”
THE $1.2 MILLION
As for the bail itself, Bensinger announced that although Sanchez had no assets of his own to put up to guarantee bail, his group of friends and supporters had put up a total of $1,260,500 in “surities” in his stead.
Bensinger then asked the judge to weigh Sanchez’s more than a decade of good deeds and a life now dedicated to helping people out of gangs and acting as “a beacon for peace,” against “unproven allegations.”
PORTRAIT OF A SHOT CALLER?
Prosecutor Elizabeth Carpenter thought otherwise. Carpenter—a 30-something woman whom one suspected had often been told she resembled actress Mary Louise Parker and had since cultivated the look—told the judge that while all the letters and support were very nice and all, Alex Sanchez had been leading a double life, and those who supported him “have been duped” by the man, because Sanchez was and always had been a shot caller—meaning a leader—of the Normandie clique of Mara Salvatrucha—or MS-13.
As proof of Sanchez’ continued gang involvement, Carpenter produced the following:
1. A photo of a bare-chested Sanchez taken post arrest that showed a Mara Salvatrucha tattoo across his breast bone. Carpenter did not mention that all of Sanchez’ many other tattoos had long-ago been removed and that the, usually-covered chest tattoo was the only one that remained.
(This might be explained by the fact that tattoo removal is quite expensive, so programs like Sanchez’ Homies Unidos and Greg Boyle’s Homeboy Industries that provide the service free to gang members wanting out of the life, usually request that homeboys and homegirls confine themselves to only getting visible tattoos removed. It may be that Sanchez simply abided by the same strictures that were required of others.)
2. Two snapshots of Sanchez at a 1999 anti-gang conference in San Francisco. In one ten-year old photo Sanchez is standing with another alleged gang member. In a second, he is shown in a tourist-like pose with several others that Carpenter said were gang members. The men appeared to be making gang signs with their fingers.
3. An account of how, on May 2 of this year, an LAPD officer observed Sanchez in conversation on the street with “five males” one of whom the prosecutor says is an active member of MS-13. No one was accused of any kind of wrongdoing. No laws were violated. Still, as often happens in certain LA neighborhoods, the officer wrote down of all the men’s names. That was it. The prosecutor cited this police contact as further evidence of “a double life.”
(Just in case anyone has dozed off reading this, I should probably note here that Sanchez is a street intervention worker who talks daily to gang members for a living. It goes with his job description. This includes members of MS-13, the gang in which he has far and away the most expertise.)
The crowd on the hearing room benches looked stunned after the photo recitation. “This is preposterous,” someone whispered. “If that’s what it takes to prove you’re an active gang member,” whispered someone else, “half of this room should expect RICO indictments.”
THE WIRE TAP
In addition to the photos, which Bensinger called laughably weak, Prosecutor Carpenter had other allegations that, if true, were far more serious.
Carpenter told the court that, using a wire tap, law enforcement had intercepted calls in 2000, 2001, 2006, and 2008 between MS-13 gang members and that Sanchez was “and active participant” in some of those calls—some of which were used, she said, to plot the murder of a gang member who was plotting to kill Sanchez and others. Instead, said Carpenter, the plotting gang member was ordered killed in El Salvador, and subsequently wound up dead. When she spoke about Sanchez, the prosecutor used his once-upon-a-time gang name, “Rebelde”—Rebel. The damning phrase that Sanchez/Rebelde was alleged to have used, according to Carpenter’s telling, was, “Then it’s war.”
The judge listened grimly then asked defense attorney Bensinger if he had anything to say about the allegations.
Yes, said Bensinger, but in order to do so, he needed to see supporting paperwork of some kind. “I provided my paperwork to the government days ago,” said Bensinger, “and the government has provided me with nothing. No transcripts, no recordings of the calls….” So it was hard to refute what he had not been able to see or hear, or in any way examine, he said. He had only Carpenter’s blanket assertions.
The judge appeared confused by Carpenter’s objections. “This isn’t a trial,” she said
But if the prosecutor was going to use these accusations as reasons why Sanchez should not get bail, Bensinger said, she needed to produce the supporting paperwork so that he and the court might assess the assertions.
Bensinger turned to Carpenter. “May I have the transcripts?” he said.
The crowd waited expectantly.
No, said Carpenter.
Startled, Bensinger asked again. This time Carpenter ignored him. Bensinger turned to the judge for help. She at first appeared flustered, then she too ignored the question.
There was another half hour or so of the same kind of disjointed back and forth
For instance, Carpenter stated that Sanchez couldn’t possibly be given bail because was a “danger to the community.” He was likely to have witnesses against him killed, she said. As to how or why Carpenter knew any of this….she didn’t say.
When Bensinger objected to Carpenter’s conspicuously undocumented generalizations, that she tossed like bright balloons, one after the other into the hearing room air—without exception, the judge overruled him.
WHERE IS TOM HAYDEN’S HOUSE?!
One of the odder moments in the hearing came when Carpenter remarked that the $1.2 million of sureties put up by supporters wasn’t very impressive because, “I see no one has put up a house.” Then bizarrely: “I see Senator Tom Hayden is in the room. But he hasn’t put up his house!”
The judge perked up at this potential moment of celebrity drama. But, after several seconds of nonverbal communication with his wife, Barbara, Hayden walked quietly over to Bensinger and whispered that he would be happy to put up his house. Bensinger announced Hayden’s offer.
Now that a house had been produced, however, Carpenter lost interest.—as did the judge.
Exasperated, Bensinger snapped that, if Sanchez was such a giant MS shot caller, where was all the money he’s been raking in? Where were the assets.? The house? The Swiss bank account?
RISK OF DANGEROUSNESS
At the end, it appeared that there was never a decision to make. The judge said that because of the “weight of evidence” that the “defendant will pose a danger to the community.”
This again sent the audience into an unhappy state of muttering. “What evidence?” someone whispered.
“The court finds that the defendant poses a risk of dangerousness,” said Rosenberg. “The court will order detention.”
In other words, Sanchez was denied bail.
Alex Sanchez looked small as he was led out of the courtroom in his white jump suit and manacles. On his way out, he did his best to shoot family and friends reassuring glances. He was okay, his expression said, although he didn’t look okay.
Supporters said afterward that the bail hearing was only the beginning, that they were heartened by Bensinger’s obvious skill and that the charges against Sanchez were flimsy and ludicrous.
Yet the reality was that Sanchez’ trial may take a year to play itself out. Maybe two. Maybe more than two. And whether he is ultimately proven guilty or innocent, he will remain behind bars for the duration.
Outside at the press conference, around five dozen people waved signs bearing messages like FREE ALEX and WE ARE ALEX SANCHEZ. Intermittently people chanted.
Meanwhile Sanchez’ wife," frameborder="0" allowfullscreen> his brother Oscar, other family, colleagues and friends—including some of the young men who said their lives had been forever changed by Sanchez—repeatedly swiped at tears as the painful realization began to seep in that, innocent or no, Alex Sanchez would be long absent from their midst.
********************************************************************************************************************
For videos of the post-hearing press conference " frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>click here.
Here are videos from the press conference after the hearing: http://www.youtube.com/WeAreAlexSanchez
“And moreover I saw under the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there; and the place of righteousness, that iniquity was there.â€
The “win at any cost†prosecution ethic has twisted and perverted the Justice Department into an unrecognizable savage beast, devoid of morality and any justice at all. Recent high profile cases, such as Senator Ted, Stevens and Numerous other cases abound showing federal prosecutors overstepping the boundaries, often in direct violation of the law.
We have many examples of prosecutorial misconduct and outright criminal behavior, but we rarely see those at fault ever being charged as criminals themselves, or being on the end of lawsuits brought by the victims of such abuse, because congress has bestowed immunity to those privileged to work in the “justice†system. The courts have ruled that prosecutors are absolutely immune for anything they do that is considered within the lines of their official duties.
They are telling us they cannot trust the system to do what is right if THEY are sued. The same prosecutors who drag us into court, who charge us with fabricated “crimes,†and who impose judgment after judgment on us, cannot possibly be expected to face the same system that governs the rest of us, as it might “distract them from their duties.â€
Equal justice under law as expressed by our founding fathers, did not carve out exceptions to be abused, by prosecutors. We need to take away their legal immunity and make public officials subject to the same sanctions that the rest of us face and restore confidence in a judicial system that has been tainted way too often.
I’ve been following your posts on this. A few points:
1. “a 30-something woman whom one suspected had often been told she resembled actress Mary Louise Parker and had since cultivated the look” Seriously? Please elaborate. Was she dressed like a pot-selling slut? It sounds like you’re trying to discredit her as if this were some sort of personal vendetta on her part against Alex.
2. As far as Carpenter “thinking otherwise” regarding letting Alex out on bail. Is it not possible for Alex’s supporters to understand that Carpenter is just doing her job as a professional? Would you expect any other prosecutor to do differently in a similar case?
3. If this were anyone else, with the same history of having been in an gang and the same accusations against him, but someone you’d NOT known personally, would you still want the person out on bail?
4. It’s interesting that Alex chose to keep the MS tattoo next to his heart. I’m sure all his friends would have been happy to pitch in to help him cover that expense. Or he could have had it removed little by little as he could afford it. Strange to look in the mirror everyday and see that. (Of course, having a MS tattoo is not illegal, still it’s interesting that he’s kept a tattoo that’s visible to *him*, as opposed to say, one on his back.) I agree with you that the tattoo doesn’t necessarily prove anything.
5. Are you and all the people who attended the hearing in support of Alex as concerned about the other defendants in this case? Do you think *they* should be out on bail since legally they are innocent until proven guilty? I mean, what real evidence have you heard that the other defendants actually committed any crime? So far it’s just the government’s word, right? What are you and Tom Hayden and the others doing on *their* behalf?
The gist of everything you’ve written on this case seems to be that because Alex is your friend, he couldn’t have possibly done what he’s accused of in this indictment.
I would expect no less of the friend of *any* defendant. However, when a journalist makes these kinds of comments, she harms her credibility.
You wrote:
****
Some voices have been comparing Sanchez’s legal troubles to those of Hector Marroquin, the former—and decidedly crooked—gang intervention worker who began an organization called No Guns then was arrested in 2007 after he was found to be dealing in ….guns.
On the surface, the two cases might appear to be similar—both men worked in gang intervention in LA. Both men were arrested and charged with serious illegal gang activity—Alex’s charges far more serious even than Marroquin’s.
But past the surface, the stories are very, very different.
Sanchez is genuinely beloved by a wide variety of people in LA and beyond. Marroquin, by contrast, was viewed by many as troubled—even before there was any kind of hard evidence that he was up to no good.
*******
What you seem to be saying is that Alex has many friends. Many friends=innocent. Marroquin did not and was thought of as “troubled” (whatever that means). Few friends=guilty.
Bottom line: You seem to be incapable of any objectivity when it comes to this case. This is understandable because you are Alex’s friend and this must be painful for you. But it’s disappointing to those of us who trust and read you because you’re also a journalist.
I have no idea if Alex is guilty, but everything I’ve read so far about him leads me to conclude that it’s not *impossible* that he could be guilty. I will wait to hear the government’s evidence.
CLF, try as I might, I’m not objective about this case. I don’t pretend to be, which is why I disclosed my personal views in the very first post. It is also why this is written in a narrative style, and not as hard news. I honestly believe an injustice is being done here. So what to do?
Yet, I appreciate your comments and you challenging me on this issue. Please continue to do so. (And, yeah, the Mary Louise Parker remark may have been a bit much.)
In answer to one of your questions about the other defendants, a woman defendant had her bail hearing right before Alex’s so many of us were present for it. She was a single mother with three kids who was alleged to have passed messages for MS-13 gang members. The prosecutor said she could face 20 years. I know nothing about her case, only what I heard in the court room. Yet, based on what was presented yesterday, I found her denial of bail equally if not more troubling. (As one veteran gang attorney present said, If this were state court, even if convicted the woman would do a year, max. But the Feds are threatening her with 20 years and managed to get her bail denied altogether.)
We will all await the court case. All I can tell you is that people far more cynical than I am are unequivocal in their disbelief of these charges against Alex Sanchez. Maybe we’ll all be proved wrong.
And about prosecutors doing their job: I’ve sat through many, many criminal court cases. In most instances, I see good prosecutors do what is a difficult job with dignity, honor and skill. On some occasions, however, I see prosecutors attempting to make two and two equal five, damn the facts or the consequences. At times, the results have been tragic. Based on her performance yesterday, it appeared that is what Elizabeth Carpenter was doing. Maybe when all the facts are laid out, a different picture will emerge. I have only what I heard yesterday to go on and, simply put, Carpenter’s inferences were unsupported by the facts she presented.
PS: When Frank Stolz of KPCC posts his full report of the hearing online I’ll link to it here. Frank is a very objective and honorable reporter, and perhaps his story will fill in some of the gaps.
PPS: I’m not troubled by this case because Alex Sanchez is my friend. In that I report on gangs I’ve seen many people whom I know and like go to prison. It always makes me sad. But most times it is because they’ve screwed up. .
CLF,
Por Dios … relax, have a bagel.
“the issue of danger is powerful.”
Interesting, not a single mention of any empathy, sympathy or concern for the LAPD officer Sanchez is accused of putting a hit on.
You don’t even bother to mention his name.
Surprising (not).
Dear Robert Parry,
I didn’t mention LAPD Detective Frank Flores because nowhere in the indictment or in the FBI press release (or in yesterday’s hearing) is Sanchez accused of having anything to do with the conspiracy to kill Detective Flores.
(NOTE: If we’re going to be sympathetic and concerned, we might want to get the guy’s name and rank right.)
Others named in the RICO indictment—but not Sanchez— are linked to the alleged plot to kill Detective Flores but shoddy reporting and your shoddy reading have conflated the two.
Please get your facts right before you start throwing accusations my direction.
In a weird side note, since Prosecutor Carpenter declined to produce wiretap transcripts for the defense to examine, what she did do is have the very same Detective Flores take the stand yesterday to say that, yes, the wiretaps did exist, and yes, Alex Sanchez was on several of the calls, although he provided few details. He said that he knew Sanchez was on because one of the speakers ID’d himself as Rebelde.
One thing that did become clear in the course of Flores’s brief testimony was that this was not purely an FBI operation, but a multi-agency task force with the LAPD providing much of the lead.
I will have much more on this as time goes along.
(THIS IS FOR WOODY)
The Michael Jackson funeral is scheduled for 10 a.m. on Tuesday, July 7, at Los Angeles’ Staples Center.
In order to do this, the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, scheduled to begin its run at Staples on July 8, had to be persuaded to postpone moving into Staples by several hours.
Insert your own circus joke here.
Somehow it seems appropriate. It will be a day for the Greatest Show on Earth to follow The Biggest Funeral in History. Jackson would love this, that’s for sure.
Can someone tell me what gang did Luis J. Rodriguez belong to? Was he really from a gang or was he a buster? What gang is going to jump him in at age 11? He sounds like a hood-jumper in all of his books. Seems not to be able to make up his mind on what neighborhood he wants to be from… Can someone that knows anything about anything here – please be honest enough and truthful to answer these questions…..???
sorry its – “HOOD-HOOPER” – my bad.
“Sanchez couldn’t possibly be given bail because was a ‘danger to the community.’ He was likely to have witnesses against him killed, she said.”
I don’t know a damned thing about this except what’s written above and the evidence sounds thin, at best. On the wiretaps, which would be damning, my assumption is that voice prints and phone traces could determine whether Sanchez did participate. It’s not beyond my ken to think he might well be guilty of involvement. A lot stranger things have happened. (As I’m sure Mark Sanford’s former enthusiasts could testify. People are as often as not prone to disappoint us.) But the prosecution seems like they’re more than a bit desperate in setting up their case. The quote above is a ridiculous justification for not granting bail – for the simple reason that if Sanchez is in the position they claim he is and as ruthless as they claim he is, he’d be able to target witnesses from jail just as easily. In any event, he wouldn’t be going after anyone himself – so they’d have to hold him incommunicado to bar him from any possibility of “participation” in threatening witnesses, which is patently illegal. Also, what witnesses ? Do they have any, other than the cops who listened to wiretaps ? Seems they really want to seperate him from his legitimate supporters and create that stigma where he comes into court through the “wrong” door – its a strategy of deliberate isolation. In a case this convoluted and lacking any apparent witness to anything, not granting bail in itself suggests a vendetta mentality on the part of prosecutors.
Also, I know nothing about these gangs, the depth of loyalties, internal power and and command structures or to what degree they appear “rational” but it strikes me as beyond strange that they’d allow someone who spent what appears to be very close to 24/7 doing work to weaken gang loyalties – with what at least appeared to be a degree of effectivness given the level of support in the “gang intervention” community – continue in a position of such power that he could pick up the phone and order hits – and that would be the substance of his day-to-day involvement. But again, sometimes reality challenges the imagination even of novelists. I’m trying to figure out the motive and the “cui bono” part of his continued role as a very high level leader, with the ability to implicate others in the worst crimes, other than psychological loyalty running rather remarkably deep. I guess if Sanchez is guilty, it means these gangs are operating at a level of sophistication, dueling realities and complexity that one associates with LeCarre novels.
Celeste, it was reported in the media about the hit on Det. Flores. Its unfortunate that so many are in denial about this arrest. Put aside everyone’s emotions on this arrest and what you think of the prosecutor. I highly doubt a judge would not have denied bail if he didn’t think this was a serious charge. People I’ve spoken to say when all the evidence comes out the truth about the double life Sanchez has been leading will come to light. Its difficult to leave a life of gang banging. Unless you relocate to a totally different enviornment it won’t happen. There are few success stories as evidence.
Janet, the hit on Detective Flores was reported misleadingly in the media on the day that the news initially broke. The indictment is a hodgepodge of issues all rolled into a single document. The part having to do with the proposed hit on Detective Flores concerns people unrelated to Alex Sanchez.
In other words, he is NOT accused of having anything to do with it. At all. Period. But some of those doing the initial reporting did not read carefully and conflated the two issues.
If you notice, that accusation has not reappeared in the press, as it was incorrect.
As for what you’re hearing from inside the department, I have excellent sources inside the department too. PLUS I am talking to multiple people with sources inside MS-13, quite frankly.
Listen, there are officers in Hollenbeck who will swear on everything that they KNOW for sure that Father Greg Boyle is an EME affiliate and that the EME meets at Homeboy. This is a little piece of knowledge they might want to share with Bill Bratton who meets at Homeboy (or more properly at the Homegirl Cafe) every Tuesday morning with his command staff.
Or, hey, maybe Bratton enjoys sharing a facility with with the Mexican Mafia.
As for the judge, as in any other profession, some judges are extremely skilled and able to independently weigh and question what is in front of them. Others not so much, as I’m sure folks you know will attest.
This particular judge was someone who one felt might benefit from watching Law and Order, a bit more regularly. She seemed terrified to cross the prosecutor in any way.
It’s possible that a more discerning judge who was in control of his or her own courtroom would have denied bail anyway due to the seriousness of the charges. But this judge was not in the least discerning and allowed the prosecutor to run the court as she wished. I’ve been present for many, many criminal court proceedings. This one wasn’t pretty.
My understanding is the bail process is a bit on the rigged side. Keeping people in jail helps get convictions – people are more likely to bargain when they are already sitting in jail. Obviously, when the accusation is this serious, it won’t affect a plea, but it’s just another part of the system that presumes guilt. Remember, the guy is only a danger if the prosecution is right.
As to the particulars, thanks for your fascinating reporting, Celeste. I hope the truth, whatever it is, becomes clear and justice is served.
Anyone here wants to bet some money big bank money that I’m pretty this GANGMEMBER away for a long time…
I’m curious about something regarding your perception of Sanchez, Celeste. Was his work so far as you could tell viewed by the gang as threatening to their “hegemony” or whatever re; local youth ? Was Sanchez visibly weakening gang ties and demonstrating success in moving kids out of the life ? Maybe that’s a stupid question, because as I said I’ve got zero knowledge of what goes on in those circles. I’m sure it’s complicated. But it would seem to play into the issue of how plausible it would be that Sanchez was leading a “double life” or some such and that the leadership of the gang would allow him to continue to function in any “responsible” position. If his work was actually shifting the dynamics of the community in relation to the gang, I don’t see how he gets to hold on to a key role. Does this question make sense ?
Hi Reg,
A perfectly sensible question. Here’s what I’ve observed. Rather than the crabs trying to pull the escaping crab back into the barrel, I’ve mostly noticed the opposite. When someone like Alex—or some of the other gang intervention folks—works to help the community, with very rare exceptions they are viewed either in a positive light, or at the very least benignly.
If Alex, on the other hand, was cooperating with the police, telling who did what, he’d not last a minute. By the same token, if he was viewed as putting himself morally above the homeboys in a way that was shaming or “disrespectful,” he would be shut out.
Helping guys looking for a way out of gangs is not considered disrespectful, nor his helping their little brothers to find better alternatives.
As for whether they’d accept someone like him in a key role—-anything’s possible. It’s impractical, though, for a host of reasons. But not impossible from a sociological perspective. When people play both sides of the street like, that, though, it’s usually for financial gain.
The reason I don’t believe Alex is guilty, has very little to do whether I like him. I like plenty of guys have great hearts and loads of talent, but are now doing time because they couldn’t quite make that fundamental change that is necessary. So, for one reason or another, they back slid.
I—and so many others—believe Alex isn’t guilty for a host of reasons that are based in logic, not sentiment.
For one thing, those who have contacts with rank and file MS—either in the Pico Union area or elsewhere—have done plenty of checking in the past week, and everyone asked laughs at the notion. I have no such contacts. Mine are elsewhere, with other gangs. But I have plenty of friends who do, to whom guys would have no reasons to lie. There isn’t so much as a whisper. If Alex was deep in the mix, there would be gossip.
Listen, it would make more sense for some of the high profile people who are supporting Alex to hedge their bets. If they are wrong, and Alex is dirty, they will lose a lot of credibility by expressing such unequivocal support. The fact that so many people have chosen to swing out without a qualifying net proves nothing, but it is worth sober consideration.
Here is the bet.
If Sanchez is found guilty, then you will have to shut down your blog permanently Ms. Fremon.
Why?
The majority of your so called “inside people” that you say feed you information are totally wrong and are just moronic idiots. Seems that all the people you say you talk to – talk to you becuase they know nothing about what is really going on behind the workings of gangs in Los Angeles. Your becoming somewhat of a laughable topic around my peers. People talk to you because you give them an ear and you seem to be easily convinced – feeling sorry for some tattoo bald head mexican guy with the sorry excuse of having grown up in a social cesspool. You only listen to those that meet your self believed criteria of a self invented lie – gangmembers can be good human beings – NOT!
If I’m wrong I’ll acknowledge publicly that Alex Sanchez is a far more skillful sociopath than I’ve previously encountered.
And if I’m right what are you putting up, poplockerone?
As for my sources, I know that it’s a comforting perspective for you and some elements within law enforcement (not all, by any means) to dismiss me and people like me as naive. God forbid that the bleeding heart, middle-aged white chick living in Topanga should, in certain instances, have better street sources than yours, what with you being all bad and everything.
That would really suck.
Here’s the thing: According to what you have just commented, you believe that every gang member or former gang member is a one-dimensional, irredeemable criminal for life. That means that you have effectively demonized the sons, brothers, uncles, nephews, and fathers of a lot of the members of the communities that you purportedly serve.
So how honest do you think those community members with those sons, brothers, etc. are going to be with you about who is or isn’t committing what crimes?
Read my book G-Dog and Homeboys and get back to me. It’s a mere $13.57 right now on Amazon.
I dare you.
Yes, I have that right to demoized everyone in my community – because I grew up in that community. I was one of those disadvantage kids, a product of a place and time much worst than the guys you defend and still made it with higher degrees. So, you people can not bullshit a guy that knows almost everyone in their mother involved in this criminal game.
By the way, many years back Father G gave gave me that book as a gift – no need to buy it.
I respect what you’ve done with your life, particularly given your past, as you’ve laid it out here at times. And if Father Greg gave you the book, that meant he respected you too.
But the assumptions you make about me, what my experiences have been, and about what and whom I know are: A. Dead wrong. B. Leave no room for conversation, and C: Really, really irritating.
PS: If you read the book, and if for some reason you don’t have the 2008 version (there are three versions: 1995, 2004, and 2008), I’ll e-mail you a copy of the new epilogue, which is the primary difference between the versions. It tells what has happened to 30 of the main characters in the book in the fourteen years since the book’s narrative ended.
Out of the 30, some are dead, some are locked up for a very long time, some are still pretty messed up, and some are soccer dads whose lives are very, very different from those they led as teenagers. People can change. Even hard core gang members. Not all are able or willing to do so. But some are.
I know I irriate you….but out of those 30 guys you wrote about, I already knew what happened to most of them even before you wrote about it. My facts and details are always very different than the ones you play out in your book.
The main concept that you dont understand is very simple. When a person grows up and is involved in this type of negative criminal behavior, they want to live life as far away from it as possible, ashamed that someone knows their past actions and identity. They dont advertise that they were a gang member or least of all- plays the part of the so called gang interventionist.
There are only three types of gang interventionists people – 1 – to steal money from government grants 2 – launder your dirty money from drug connected proceeds 2 – because you a green lighter and obtaining protection from whatever crooked individual is running that program.
If your really out of “it”, your going to do everything in your power to focus on yourself and your immediate family members. You expect nothing in return – no accords no awards. If you take the time to help someone out, its going to be because it was an unintentional contact – a setting where you only get a one time shot at it.
You straight out have to tell that street kid that your not there to play daddy, not their big homie and most imporantly – your not there to hold their little hand on how to live life – your just kicking down some good advice on how one regrets living one own’s miserable jacked-up life – take it or leave it.
That’s just the beginning of it….
I ran into a cousin the other day at a family gathering. An ex-gang member from Compton I haven’t seen for like 7 years. I told him about how some little youngster in his old neighborhood was using his street moniker – the youngster of course didn’t even know that more than 30 years back there was another guy with the some moniker – but seriously more ruthless. My cousin respectfully requested from me not to tell the youngster about him or his stories. My cousin stated that he doesn’t want anyone to remember him nor does he ever want to be remembered as a gang member. Today, he does everything in his power not to glorify his life as a gang member. His kids are all skaters and into little league baseball tounaments.
He blames the devil for those years of trying to kill people and doing hard drugs. He tried suicide three times. He stated that he lives life peaceful today and accepts the internal pain, hurt, and guilt – knowing that he will never be forgiven by God almight for the people he hurted in his past. He just wants to live a normal life and not be looked down upon like a walking outcast or a reject vet. He just wants internal peace and forgiveness for his wrongdoings and sins. Something he states and believes that he may never ever obtained.
Today, he is a mananger at a resturant and attends a christian church weekly. Donates his time at the Church trying to save people from addiction.
How did he change?
About 9 years ago, his drug connect shot his own homie in the head over three pounds of methamphetamine.
He said to himself – Is three pounds worth killing your own homie? The godfather of your kid?
Shit, I guess he figured it all out – the truth of the gang game – You could be next.
That made him drop out of being a fucking criminal and I’m proud of him.
Now ask him about your boy – Alex Sanchez, and see what he has to tell you.
When you speak from your experience, poplockerone, instead of randomly throwing tomatoes at me, it’s always interesting.
And, although I disagree with you about a few specific cases— namely people Alex Sanchez, Aquil Basheer, the late Bo Taylor, and the like— by and large I completely agree with your premise that those who want to get out, can only do so by moving away from the neighborhood, and having zero to do with anything gang related. In all but very rare cases, that’s the only thing that works.
How can you put Alex Sanchez in the same sentence or grape bowl with the other two individuals mentioned. Thats a slap to those people’s faces.
Maybe if you compare him to Big Weasel, Spider, Bow Wow, Blinky….ect. Then I would agree with you.
CF – thanks for that helpful response to my Q.
Poplock is like the guy in AA who just knows…knows…that one drop of alcohol will…fuck him up. And everybody’s just like him. Except the view from the high fucking horse is about as valid as from the gutter and there’s a through line of arrogance from where you were to where you are that diminishes your credibility. You remind me of David Horowitz…and asshole of the left who decided to change his lifed…do a total 180…and become an asshole of the right. Everybody ain’t you. And I’ve read enough of your comments here to know you’re no fucking genius, despite your journey. Give it a rest…
Reg – stick to your comments of knowing zero knowledge of what goes on….jack shit.
[…] leader and head of the well-regarded nonprofit, Homies Unidos. A month ago, Sanchez was named in a federal racketeering indictment and accused of plotting the murder of a rival gang member. The case alleges Sanchez was leading a […]