End of the Week Social Justice Wrap Up

POLICE COMMISSION MAY HAVE THREE CHIEF CHOICES BY TUESDAY—OR NOT

According to the LA Times:

The Los Angeles Police Commission today completed two days of interviews with candidates vying to be the next LAPD chief. Officials hope to select three finalists by Tuesday.

The commission, a civilian panel that oversees the Los Angeles Police Department, met with 13 applicants. All but but two were LAPD deputy chiefs and assistant chiefs.

According to the Daily News:

Los Angeles Police Commission members hope to narrow the field of 13 applicants to the final three, possibly as early as Tuesday but no later than Nov. 16, commission president John Mack said after the interviews held at the City Club on Bunker Hill.

The Police Commission wouldn’t ID the two outsiders, said John Mack, as they both presently have Chief jobs somewhere else.

UPDATE: BY THE WAY, A NOTE TO THE LA TIMES: Could you possibly stump more obviously for Charlie Beck—in Joel Rubin’s piece (which was good in many ways, except for the Charlie stumping), the accompanying photos, and the unsigned editorial of October 21. I think Charlie would make a very good chief too (among a number whom I think would be excellent) AND, sure, I think if someone has the inside track right this minute, it is Beck.

Yet this is not a done deal. So quit slanting your coverage (and, doing things like tarring Sharon Papa for a situation that anybody honest would tell you was not of her making). It’s not one bit helpful to the process.

SATURDAY UPDATE: Since writing this, I’ve rethought the matter. See correction in newer post above.

---

AND WHILE WERE ON THE SUBJECT OF POLICE, ANOTHER BIG GANG CRACK DOWN

Before dawn on Thursday, more than 1,100 LAPD officers and FBI agents were banging on doors to make 45 arrests of members of the Rolling 60’s

Lots of people have the story, but why not listen to what the smart students at Annenberg Radio News did with it. They have more in the way of original reporting on the issue than either the LA Times, AP or the NY Times.

---

SCOTUS AND LWOP KIDS

The November issue of the American Bar Association Journal has a very thoughtful article on the two upcoming Supreme Court cases that will both challenge the notion of juveniles doing Life Without Parole—LWOP.

Here is how it opens:

“As any parent knows,” children are different. So said U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy more than four years ago in Roper v. Simmons. There, a deeply divided court ruled 5-4 that executing those who committed murder as ju­veniles vio­lated the Eighth Amendment’s proscription against cruel and unusual punishment. Part of the reason, the court said, was that juveniles were less cul­pable, less mature and less responsible than adults.

“The reality that juveniles still struggle to define their identity means it is less supportable to conclude that even a heinous crime committed by a juvenile is evidence of irretrievably depraved character,” Kennedy wrote for the majority.

“From a moral standpoint,” he added, “it would be misguided to equate the failings of a minor with those of an adult, for a greater possibility exists that a minor’s character deficiencies will be reformed.”

This month the court returns to the subject of juvenile justice by examining what has been termed the penultimate punishment for juveniles, life without parole.

In a pair of cases from Florida, Graham v. Florida and Sullivan v. Florida, the court must determine whether Roper’s reasoning—that juvenile defendants are fundamentally different from adult defendants—extends from the death penalty to life without parole. Arguments are scheduled for Nov. 9.

MORE AFTER THE JUMP….including Rush Limbaugh, the Willingham case and the Chicago 7

---

EVEN THE LA TIMES ED BOARD IS WEIGHING IN ON THE WILLINGHAM CASE

It isn’t the most gracefully written editorial and mostly amounts to a bunch of tisk-tisking at Texas Governor Rick Perry for his shameless attempts to deep six investigations into the Willingham arson case—for his own political reasons, yet it is good the LA Times is weighing in.

They might have wanted to fact check a little better though. (See below.)

Even in Texas, where the death penalty is embraced with fervor, the revelation that the governor permitted an execution to proceed in 2001 [WRONG DATE PEOPLE! Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in 2004.] despite abundant evidence that the prosecution was based on seriously flawed scientific methods — well, that might not be helpful to his reelection chances. Not during a tough campaign…..

NPR has a story on the issue as well.

---

THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7, 40 YEARS LATER

It is still an iconic event, all these years later says the American Bar Association Journal.

A perfect storm of political unrest, generational conflict and a biased judge set the stage for a 1969 trial that is still memorable 40 years later for its drama and iconic import, participants in an American Bar Association panel told a standing-room-only audience Tuesday.

Although the months-long Chicago Seven conspiracy trial ignited international debate—one searing image was of a bound and gagged Bobby Seale, originally the eighth defendant in U.S. v. Dellinger, et al.—panelists offered a behind-the-scenes glimpse of little-known aspects of the high-profile trial. Brought against activists who participated in anti-Vietnam War protests at the Democratic National Convention in 1968, the federal case offered an opportunity for defendants including Tom Hayden, Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin to create a media circus, and they took full advantage of it….

---

RUSH LIMBAUGH, CLIMATE CHANGE AND LYING

It seems that Rush Limbaugh recently suggested that NY Times climate change reporter Andrew C. Revkin ought to kill himself if he was so worried about carbon emissions. Then Limbaugh proceeded to make stuff up about Revkin that was both vile and verifiably untrue.

Having nothing to do with Limbaugh’s politics, this is not healthy stuff to put out into the airwaves. (And, no, I’m not advocating censorship, I’m advocating some kind of personal responsibility. And, yes, I realize that, at this moment in our culture, I’m spitting in the wind.)

In any case, NPR has a story on the issue that—apart from Limbaugh’s mendacious, verbally violent bile—happens to be informative regarding the evolving state of journalism. Give it a listen.

---

COURT SLAMS LAPD FOR SEIZING—AND KEEPING—$$$ SEIZED

R. Scott Moxley of the OC Weekly has the story.

In a remarkable opinion issued today with potential Orange County implications, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit blasted the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) for committing “highly objectionable,” “tainted,” “reckless,” “misleading” and “illegal” conduct in a 2005 attempt to seize more than $186,400 from a legally compliant Southern California medical marijuana distributorship.

The justices showed no patience for LAPD’s efforts to keep the cash for itself and then later–after it was clear they couldn’t take possession legally–transferred it to Thomas P. O’Brien’s LA-based U.S. Attorney’s office, which planned to kickback as much as 80 percent of the money to the local cops…..

Read on.

---

(Photo by David McNew/Getty Images North America)