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.)
Evidently there are a number of Zombies in and around the local MS-13 cliques—which is common in gangs. There might be a guy with the nickname of Zombie. But there may also be Lil’ Zombie…..Big Zombie….and heaven knows what other permutation of the nickname Zombie (or Sleepy or Dreamer or P’Nut or Snyper or Loco or…..you get the picture).
Anyway it seems that Bensinger’s Zombie (whom we’ll randomly designate as Zombie 2) dropped a whole lot of identifiers during the course of the long conversation, like references to several family members and—helpfully—his actual name.
With the tiniest amount of police work Flores could have verified which Zombie he had on this call—since it was so important to his case.
When asked if he did any of that follow-up investigation, Flores admitted that he had not. When Bensinger asked why, Flores said that he didn’t need to do any further checking because he knew it was Zombie/Juan on the call. (The exchange between Flores and Bensinger was longer than I am portraying here.) And how did the detective know he had the right Zombie in the face of fairly convincing evidence to the contrary? Flores did not elucidate.
However, what Flores did say is that Zombie/Juan was one of the feds’ informants, that after he was arrested for Cameron’s murder, he began singing like a bird and not only confessed to the killing himself, he also fingered Alex Sanchez and said that Sanchez told him on the phone to kill Cameron.
I am not privy to the prosecution’s whole case, but I gathered that since the Feds are basing the bulk of their charges on the four wiretap conversations, it is crucial that they place Zombie/Juan on one of those calls. If Zombie/Juan is not on the fourth call when Cameron’s death is supposedly ordered (in verbiage that is ambiguous at best), then the admitted murderer’s insistence that Sanchez was the shot caller who directed him to do the hit, starts to suggest either mendacity or coercion or both.
Bensinger also had a declaration by the sister of Zombie 2—the not Juan Zombie. The sister was prepared to say in court that it was indeed the voice of her brother on the call, not the guy that Flores and the feds insisted was on the call, and who would later kill Cameron.
But Judge Real was not interested. “It is irrelevant who Alex Sanchez talked to on these calls!” he shouted at Bensinger.
Repeatedly through the proceedings Judge Real leaned toward the attorney and the audience to shout, “I will decide what is important!”
He did not actually yell, “I am the decider!” But he came very close.
6.
After a rather battered Bensinger sat down, the prosecutor got up. It was not the previous prosecutor, Elizabeth Carpenter, but a woman who appeared to be more experienced and more in possession of some kind of gravitas than Carpenter, who was still present, but sidelined.
The new prosecutor summarized the government’s previous arguments: Sanchez was leading a double life. Sanchez was a flight risk. Sanchez was danger to the community and would think nothing of having people killed who threatened him. She quoted the phrase from the four phone calls that was considered to be the most damning: “He said, ‘We have said it. We will go to war.’ And one week later, [Cameron] was dead,” she said.
The prosecutor added that the amount of support Sanchez had received from friends and community members “makes him uniquely suited to flee the jurisdiction.”
More muttering from the audience.
Whether or not this meant that the government’s attorneys believed that people like Reverend Cecil Murray, former pastor of the First AME Church, and former California Senator Tom Hayden were going to form some sort of underground railroad to spirit Sanchez out of the country was not made clear.
7.
When she sat down, Bensinger again stood and started to counter the prosecutor’s allegations. There had been more than 120 letters of support from people ranging from academics to clergy to city leaders, he said, and $2.5 million in surities and property put up by friends and community members to guarantee Sanchez’s bail, as he had no assets of his own….he was devoted to his family….he had ties to the community… And so on.
He did not get very far before Judge Real interrupted.
“Mr. Kensinger!” (For the duration of the hearing Judge Real conflated the attorney’s first and last names into the Brangelina combo of “Kensinger.”) “Mr. Sanchez has not met the burden of proving he is not a danger…”
Bensinger appeared to be on the verge of pointing out that he had not, in fact, been allowed to present any evidence to that effect, but thought better of it.
“Out of all those letters of support,” continued Judge Real, “no one approached it from the angle that Mr. Sanchez will appear. I read them all and I didn’t notice that anywhere.”
Since this was patently and demonstratively false, Bensinger bounced out of his seat to protest. The lawyer began to cite specific letters including a letter from Tom Parker, a retired FBI agent who used to be the assistant special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Bureau. In this letter, which was read aloud at an earlier hearing, Parker said something to the effect he would personally guarantee that Sanchez would appear in court.
But Judge Real waved away Bensinger’s words like so many pesky flies. “I studied all the manuscripts and the letters,” he said.
And with that Judge Manual Real announced there would be no bail.
9.
“He reminds me of Julius Hoffman,” said Tom Hayden grimly as he walked to the door—making reference to the infamous jurist, U.S. District Judge Julius Hoffman, who—exactly 40 years ago— oversaw Hayden’s own trial when he was a young man and a member of the so-called Chicago Seven.
There had been a rally in the park across from the court before the hearing, and there was a rally afterward that included a small gaggle of news cameras.
I sat with two of Sanchez’s children away from the commotion. Sanchez has a 15-year-old son, who is also named Alex, and a 13-year-old named Marlon. Nearby was their cousin, Vanessa, also 13.
I asked the boys if they’d been able to see their dad much. ” Pretty much, which is good,” said Alex Jr, who was doing his best to be upbeat and mature. Marlon the 13-year-old also tried to be upbeat for a minute, then lowered his head and began to cry quietly.
10.
On the way home from the hearing, I exchanged calls and messages with others who had been there. Some veteran prosecutors and investigators who had been watching the case with interest from the sidelines described the proceedings as ‘extraordinary.’ ”
The next step will be trial. No dates have as yet been set.
*I mistakenly wrote that Kerry Bensinger is working probono for Alex Sanchez, but he is court appointed.
I look forward to Surefire and PoppedClock’s spirited “informed” defense of the ravings of a senile old man and his suppression of evidence. Also their abuse of Celeste for committing journalism and, of course, me for tweaking their terminally weak shit.
“then the admitted murderer’s insistence that Sanchez was the shot caller who directed him to do the hit, starts to suggest either mendacity or coercion or both.”
**************************
How is it you know Zombie was coerced?
Mob and Gang turncoats and liars are as common as mobsters and gangsters themselves.
You don’t have the ability to tweak me Reg. Your information comes from the writings of Celeste alone and you did nothing in the matter of commenting on her entire post. You’re a big mouth and fraud as usual Reg, I’ll leave it at that.
The fact Celeste writes so much about what’s wrong with this detention of Sanchez and so little on the most telling part of this story in my opinion, that Sanchez said ‘We have said it. We will go to war.’ And one week later, [Cameron] was dead,†shows where her loyalties lie and her objectivity ends. I didn’t hear Celeste say that conversation didn’t take place but correct me if I’m wrong on that Celeste. Real is the ‘decider’ in his court and he knows it. He isn’t the only old judge that should be gone.
I don’t know exactly what difference Father G or the tatoo testimony would have matter when you considered them in comparision to the most ‘damning’, as you put in Celeste, testimony against the idea of granting Sanchez bail.
If Sanchez did order the hit than Parker or anyone else claiming they could ‘guarentee’ his appearance is all talk. Sanchez I’m sure has the connections to flee to anywhere he wants and the bringing up of names like Hayden and Murray is just added fluff, it means zero. It’s just a poke at Real and the prosecution from a Sanchez supporter.
That’s where I lose Celeste though, when her ‘journalism’ takes that hard left turn and common sense and objectivity get lost in the process. I understand that when a person has a personal connection to the case, as Celeste obviously does, it changes your style a bit but ‘journalists’, in my opinion, need to steer clear of that choice if they want what they write to be taken seriously by everyone reading their words.
The bottom line is a guy is dead, won’t argue it’s probably no great lost to society, and the guy who seems to have had a good reason for wanting that guy dead is sitting in jail based on conversations he took part in.
Let justice run its course.
Just a though, why didn’t Sanchez go to the FBI or LAPD, or even Parker with his concerns when he found out about the ‘green light’? I mean if he’s such an upstanding citizen now shouldn’t he have the common sense to go to the right sources to help him?
Celeste thanks so much for this write up. Just a question — will Judge Real be the judge hearing the trial? Thanks.
Alex can serve as a role model for young wanna-be cholos from his jail cell. The young kids should learn that your own homies are most likely to have you killed for any “slipping”, or will stab you in the back to save their own ass.
I remember when Cheryl Green was killed by memebers of the 204st street gang, and the killers of Cherly Green stabbed and slashed the neck of another 204st. cholo who they “thought” might be a snitch. The picture of the person who almost has his entire head cut off, should have been on the walls of every gang intervention program. The young wanna-be fools who are being brain-washed need to know what really happens among the gang members.
Ms. Fremon – why would you ever use a defendant’s children to obtain pity and showcase your reporting?
That’s really unethical bias reporting….do you teach that to your students?
I’m going to be gone most of the day so I’ll just respond quickly.
Surefire, I’m simply reporting on what went on in court. (Oops. And now that I think about it, I left off a line from the post. I’ll fix that.) I can’t write further about that “damning” line, because I don’t know anything more than I told you—at least not that I can verify.
The drama is unfolding piece by piece for all of us—bleeding hearts like me, and veteran law enforcement and prosecutors who tend to think Alex guilty. Where ever we fall in that spectrum, those of us interested in this case are all watching with fascination—and talking to each other about it.
In these posts, I’m trying to give you all as much of that as I am able without betraying private conversations.
However this plays out, it is I believe an important and highly human story. (And the LA Times should be covering it.)
As for why the gang intervention guy, former gang member, didn’t go to law enforcement with concerns that he’d been green lit for a rumor that he was snitching to law enforcement…..
Yes, of course, that would have been the right thing to do. But we both know exactly why—rightly or wrongly—someone with Alex’s experience might think it better to just handle it. Yet those actions don’t suggest either guilt or innocence. But you know all this.
WTF, reread that section and logic will answer your question if you can remove your own biases for a minute.
In brief: I’m saying that if it is crucial to the feds’ case that Zombie/Juan was told by Alex in a particular phone call to kill Cameron, and Zombie/Juan is demonstrably NOT on that phone call when this order supposedly took place (but, in a case of mistaken identity the Feds think he is because, due to their wiretap they misidentify another person as Zombie/Juan)….then Zombie/Juan and the feds have a bit of a problem with their story.
I don’t know any more than I’m telling you. I’m simply following the logic. This, I suspect, is why the prosecution is insisting that Zombie/Juan was on the call despite clear evidence to the contrary.
Okay, I’m off to work.
IrsulaIguaran, I don’t know for sure. That was my impression. We were talking about it as we spilled out of court. Tom Hayden seemed to think so.
Okay, this is really the last thing I can answer.
poplockerone, it would have been nice if you’d asked that question cleanly, instead of with the insults attached.
But I’ll answer it anyway. I happened to speak to the kids at some length, and as a mother they got to me, so I decided to include a snippet of that conversation as a way to end the piece. (AND, photos of them happened to be the best ones of those I quickly snapped at the rally with my iPhone. I don’t know who that little girl is. I simply snapped her because she was hold the poster and it was a good graphic.)
SO….do I give you that moment with the kids at the end of the story—-together with the disclaimer, which I added so people wouldn’t say exactly what you said—or do I leave them out altogether?
Whether Alex is guilty or innocent he still has nice kids who are truly suffering. That’s a sad fact of this situation—or any situation in which a parent is incarcerated.
That was the first conversation I’d ever had with Alex’s kids. (It was far longer, more interesting and more detailed than I am portraying.) And I chose to pass it along to y’all.
If that didn’t work for you, fine.
But good grief. Do you really have to impugn my ethics as a journalist and my teaching ability just to disagree with me?
It’s really, really wearying.
C: it would have been nice if you’d asked that question cleanly, instead of with the insults attached.
Did you mean that to apply to reg as well? If so, his comments would be very brief.
Actually the pictures children are a good reminder of why Alex is NOT a flight risk. Men do not run away from children such as these.
Honestly, I believe that Alex deserves bail and that the judge obviously had made up his mind to deny bail and was not going to waste his time listening to any facts or anyone else.
CF: “The drama is unfolding piece by piece for all of us…”
Not really all of us, as certain commenters here make clear by their certain “knowledge” of guilt in a case that’s obviously got some pitfalls for the prosecution that went unreported until people with admitted sympathies for Sanchez brought the information forward. If there’s anything fraudulent in these comments, it’s the spew from the opposite direction. “Hard left?” Pretty strange accusation coming from some moron who defends Rush Limbaugh by citing….uh…Jamie Foxx trash-talking Miley Cyrus. (Incidentally, Surefire, I don’t give a fuck about Jamie Foxx but he strikes me as an asshole, although I don’t follow the National Inquirer or wherever you get your info about Ms. Cyrus and Mr. Foxx – but just to show I can hit a curve ball, if Jamie Foxx makes a bid to manage Miley Cyrus or invest in her career, I’d say he deserves any abuse heaped on him.)
Back to earth, Celeste’s reporting here adds important layers to the Sanchez story, whether one agrees with her admitted POV or not. (Personally, I find Sanchez’ communications suspicious, but on the basis of the dueling transcripts, the notion that he can be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit murder appears to be totally off-the-wall and wishful thinking among folks who happen not to trust him.) While Celeste is putting out totally honest reports as the case develops – including her own POV and close relationship to the subject matter – as good journalists delving into such stories should – the stuff certain commenters persist in throwing at her is more on the order of garbage.
Just a clarification: I am pretty sure that Kerry is Alex’s court appointed attorney and is not working on this case pro bono.
Maybe you should read more Reg than the leftist crap that infects your brain, the Foxx comments were on all types of blogs. As usual you have nothing to say, just more babble. I asked Mavis to source her Rush quotes but she didn’t, and would argue any legitimate quotes were racist except to whiney old men and leftist garbage like you.
I understand your point Celeste about why Sanchez didn’t go to law enforcement but if he’s truly left the gang behind than that should be 100%. Pop is obviously on top of things and asked about him being “jumped out”. Didn’t hear any response from you or anyone else on that.
Pokey, gangsters are all about themselves and their homies, kids are an after thought.
Celeste – Do you know if the defense in these types of bail hearing is always as limited in their ability to present evidence as they were in this case, or was Real making it much tougher than normal for them?
Surefire: “I asked Mavis to source her Rush quotes but she didn’t…”
Maybe because anyone with a pulse could easily find them “on all types of blogs.”
I shouldn’t have to, but I’ll even do the work for you:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34938
Thank you Celeste for your work. I will take your class any day!
I’d agree race baiting, that all races take part in, racist though, nope.
Incinirator, shut up with that syrupy Eddie Haskell shit. Act like a man, like Sure Fire. Woody, your about as funny as a beer fart in a space suit.
I told surefire I wasn’t going to play the quote game for this exact reason. He’d rather fight about what counts as racist or deflect attention to Jamie Foxx than actually stand up and say that he thinks Rush Limbaugh’s statements are acceptable. It’s cowardly really.
p.s. for those who care, I’m a dude. Mavis Beacon was an old typing program.
We stand corrected ‘Mavis’, thank you for the heads up.
“race baiting” vs. “racist”
To in fact be a racist, you have to be a minority like Sonia Sotomayor or Al Sharpton, or a white liberal who wants to impose reverse racism – the only kind of racism left – on other white people. Conservative whites are still occasionally racially insensitive (or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that minorities are overly sensitive to heart-felt and honest remarks by well-meaning conservatives) – but whites on the right are never actually racist. Everyone knows this.
“Mavis Beacon was an old typing program”. I knew that! Mavis taught me to tripe, errrr type.
Regarding the Rush. It’s amazing that mere words, meter, and antagonistic intent can inspire so much emotion in those unfortunate enough to have his blather invade their space. Get a grip, folks.
“but whites on the right are never actually racist. Everyone knows this” Yup I knew that too!
Read post 19 Mavis that was put up 45 minutes before your stupidity hit the board.
Only pussies bitch about race dialogue that everyone engages in to some degree and stretch it constantly to racist remarks.
Here we go again.
Alex’s lawyer Kerry Bensinger “is a tall, fit, affable, very smart man and a skilled researcher” and also “calm and intelligent.”
Judge Real is “85” 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.”
It’s too bad Boston Legal if off the air, because that’s exactly where this kind of writing belongs. Once again, you’ve set up your good guys and your bad guys and now you’re ready to tell your story. This is “advocacy journalism” apparently.
I was sickened when I scrolled down and found the photos of Alex’s kids. My thoughts were very similar to poplockerone’s. It felt it was very exploitative and a calculated move to elicit pity and show your connections as a reporter. (Oh, and thanks to you, now Alex’s kids will for a lifetime have their photos on the internet in connection for this story, along with their comments, the fact that they were crying, etc. At such a young age, I’m sure they are not even aware of what they were really consenting to and what it really means to have their photos taken by you. Further, you could even be putting their lives in danger.) I feel horrible for the kids and what they must be going through. And worse still that you chose to put them in this post.
I don’t know why you find poplockerone’s charge that this is unethical and biased to be an insult. There was nothing offensive in his words.
As for you growing weary from the comments. Surely someone who hangs with gangsters can’t tire that easily, can she?
On the “jumped out” point — there is no such thing as being jumped out of the gang. There is no ritual by which one can formally declare that he is no longer a member, and the fact that the witness alluded to this fictitious event makes me question the rest of his testimony. People leave the gang by declaring they have left, joining the church or an anti-gang group like Homies Unidos, starting a family, or other markers of a straight life. It is usually a process, not something that happens once in some declarative way. Furthermore the whole idea of H.U. and other groups around the country (as I understand them) is that gang members must leave behind the criminal elements of the life, but not necessarily the camaraderie and survival/social/cultural network the gang represents. The fact that so few people understand this dynamic is causing part of the bias against and ignorance of Alex’s work. Even if one disagrees with the Homies model or believes that the organization requires reform, oversight, or clearer operating regulations, it is not at all clear that these ideological disputes provide a reasonable basis for a federal criminal prosecution that carries a life sentence.
surefire, comment #19 admits that Rush race-baits and argues that everybody does it. There is no statement of approval or condemnation.
You can say, I disapprove of some of Rush Limbaugh’s remarks and understand why others might find them offensive. Or you can endorse his comments. Or you can continue to weasel around it.
Well, whats it going to be Sure Fire. Are you you going to step up to the plate or are you ‘gonna weasel it out’?
I think its time you accepted some personal responsability. You can’t play the dumb card to my listeners any longer. Pass me the Advil.
Ms. Fremon – I truly believe that people in any type of work should never use children for leverage. I was not trying to sucker punch you with my comment.
Innocent until proven guilty OR GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT? Our criminal justice system is simply broken. When you have a system that has ties with slavery, genocides and corruption, injustices will continue to be carried out in the name of justice, freedom and democracy. Many of us, including the author of this, do not give credence to a broken system that is based on white supremacy, male supremacy and oppression. This system has historically worked in favor of the elites, the middle-to-high-classes and those who have the monetary resources and influential connections. Real only cares about being politically correct. Based on Real’s disposition on Monday, whether Alex is guilty or innocent is not his priority.
Celeste, when Popkorn calls you Ms. Fremon, I imagine, dare I say it, its his primitive way of saying: I’m f*cking serious Celste!!! and I want you to know it, little lady!!!
Big man, poplockerone.
I never weasel out of anything Mavis. Do I agree with all of Rush’s comments, no. Do I find them race baiting rather than racist, yes without a doubt. Do I undersatnd why some people have a problem with them, of course, but I’m not the real sensitive type when it comes to the use of language to make people uncomfortable. I grew up on comedians like Pryor, Carlin and Kinison and saw the truth in much of what they said that might have angered others.
Where Rush made people uneasy with his McNabb comments beacuse he’s simply Rush, Foxx, an academy award winner, made remarks about a teen age girl that went way beyond what Rush said and got little buzz because minorities mostly get a pass and everyone knows it. You don’t care what he said Mavis, you’re only about the white guy so forgive me if I can’t take you too seriously. Racist actions have to be called out by people regardless of whoever says them based on the content of what took place not based on political leanings or color of skin.
I could load the page with remarks by others that are every bit as race baiting, and in many case actually racist, than what Rush has said but since he scares the shit out of the left and the media is run by the left he gets all the negative play.
Jane -I couldn’t find any other way of telling you this, but-your so stupid.
I say “Ms. Fremon” out of great respect. Like addressing a school teacher of police officer.
You, on the other hand, must have some disrespectful manners and morals.
If you want to know something about me, ask me and dont make assumptions.
Notice how Reg first changed the topic of the thread (post 13) so he could bash people with his race comments, or did you miss that Mavis? Your “deflect” remark about me was nothing more than the usual bs you post while your boy shoots off his big fucking mouth.
“I grew up on comedians like Pryor, Carlin and Kinison and saw the truth in much of what they said that might have angered others.”
Wow, you sure are a sophisticated and wise man–you “grew up” on Pryor, Carlin, and Kinison! What the fuck are you–35? I thought you were a half-retired half-retarded cop. Christ, I saw Kinnison when I was a teenager and even then I thought his schtick was as tired as yours: flatulating hot air like a horse’s ass.
The internet was made for pussies like you, you must have peed your pants the day you realized it.
Later troll, you’re history.
I say “Ms. Fremon†out of great respect. Like addressing a school teacher of police officer.
Of course. Celeste and us gals have a name for you ….pussy.
“he scares the shit out of the left and the media is run by the left”
We love Rush because he makes the rightwing look totally loony and alienates normal people – and the notion that the media is run by “the left” is a totally dipshit canard.
“minorities mostly get a pass and everyone knows it.”
I think this says it all. Just the kind of view you want from somebody policing LA.
I appreciate Poplockerone’s respect and respect him in return for the passion he brings to his law enforcement work—even though we regularly disagree.
On the issue of children, I can understand your objections. I never include children in a story lightly as I am very, very mindful that there can be collateral consequences.
Alex Sanchez’s kids have been to every legal proceeding and, to my knowledge, have been to most of the public events along with cousins and other family members. (Sanchez has a large and very close and supportive family.) I’m guessing their mom has allowed this because it seems to be steadying to the kids to be part of the efforts about his defense, rather than being stuck at home worrying. This seems to be particularly true of the 15-year-old.
As a consequence, they have been photographed before, by people other than me.
I did my best to treat the boys and the girl cousin in my post with care and with a very light touch. Whether I succeeded, or should have portrayed them at all is, of course, a judgment call. Yet, they are really nice and amazingly dignified kids in the midst of what has to feel like the worst of nightmares. Documenting that, to me, validates, not diminishes or harms them. But again, this is an intuitive judgment call, and one that skates an edge, to be sure. And I can completely understand that someone else might not feel it is the right one.
Every stat shows you don’t know what you’re talking about Reg. Same as Mavis can’t back up her stupidity neither can you. Facts are facts, use your leftist viewss to dispute but don’t use facts.
Sure Fire,
What they were responding to is your opinion. Those are not facts.
Surefire – you’re a ridiculous asshole and wouldn’t know a fact if it kicked you in the balls.
Uh, that’s definitely not the raised level of discourse I’ve been hoping for.
I just love all of the insulated, sheltered middle class gang experts here. Such interesting reads…
[…] is the self-admittedly and vigorously pro-Sanchez WitnessLA’s description of the argument, which its editor, Celeste Fremon has headlined, “Arresting Alex Sanchez: Part 6: The Judge […]