The Santa Cruz City Council has scheduled a Special “Study” Session on Homelessness for 7 PM at 809 Center St. (City Council Chambers) for Tuesday, March 30th. Only one day short of April Fools day.This is the Council that recently voted an Continue reading
Tag Archives: Local Police repression
Thoughts on Escalating Police Violence in Santa Cruz
VIEW THE VIDEO AT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Tyj3yxwy-o .
> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:02:51 -0700
> Subject: The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?
> From: dbruceloisel@gmail.com
> To:
>
> The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?
>
> April 25, 2013
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Tyj3yxwy-o
>
> The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?
>
>
>
> Yesterday I watched the Youtube video of a drunk homeless man being
> accosted by law enforcement I couldn’t help wonder what other options
> could have been employed by the persons responsible for public safety
> (homeless persons are included under the definition of the “public”).
> Let’s explore the options: the police could have walked by, smiled and
> kept moving. This would be my favorite. They could have questioned the
> duo, and then moved on, realizing they were drunk and minding their
> own business and harmless – number two on my list. They could have
> arrested them and when they got belligerent, “tasered” them, saving
> the one guy from a potential brain damaging blow to the head from a
> cement collision and resolving the situation – not the best option
> but better than a hospital stay. Apparently this dangerous situation
> called for backup and a physical confrontation.
>
>
>
> According the Santa Cruz police department there were 3 homicides, 33
> rapes, 83 robberies, 313 aggravated assaults, 527 burglaries, 2792
> acts of larceny, 264 auto thefts and 21 acts of arson. That makes 11
> of these types of crime per day. So I am just wondering if police time
> could be better spent on these types of crimes. Sitting on a bench
> drunk didn’t make the list for 2012 but there will be at least one
> offence for 2013. The good news is the Santa Cruz police department
> has launched Twitter and Facebook Pages and has a Mobile App for
> iPhone and Droid!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Back to the dynamic duo. So let me get this straight, there are two
> guys on a bench, drunk, but doing a whole lot of nothing, and not
> really in any condition to walk, let alone able to creating mayhem. So
> pretty much the sum total of their transgression is akin to speeding
> or jay walking – it appears to me these two guys were totally
> harmless…so, here’s the result, the police initiate a confrontation,
> then the situation escalates, the two become belligerent (they weren’t
> belligerent before the cops arrived, begging the question what’s the
> catalyst?). This results in a booking, hospital visit, jail time for
> one, costing the tax payers tens of thousands of dollars, issuing
> nuisance citations that will never be paid, generating arrest warrants
> (again costing more money), the officers will get paid 1.5 their pay
> for overtime and retire at 45 with a healthcare benefits and a
> generous pension…and the City of Santa Cruz gets sued into oblivion
> (again) by a smart young attorney …not to mention the guy got his
> face bashed in and potential brain damage and pain…and for what? Who
> wins here? The man was belligerent. Who gives a shit? My kids are
> belligerent and so are my employees. So what? Adults handle these
> situations with common sense. The new buzz issue these days is
> bullying, but this is worse than bullying, it’s brutality. The
> standard justification for acts like this is how hard the job of the
> police is – as if this justifies assault? Being a doctor is a hard
> job. Working in the fields is a hard job. Having a hard job doesn’t
> justify being an ass hole. This is crime creation, not law
> enforcement. And they could have just walked by.
>
> Posted by D. B. Loisel.NORSE’S NOTES:
> Subject: The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?
> From: dbruceloisel@gmail.com
> To:
>
> The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?
>
> April 25, 2013
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>
> The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?
>
>
>
> Yesterday I watched the Youtube video of a drunk homeless man being
> accosted by law enforcement I couldn’t help wonder what other options
> could have been employed by the persons responsible for public safety
> (homeless persons are included under the definition of the “public”).
> Let’s explore the options: the police could have walked by, smiled and
> kept moving. This would be my favorite. They could have questioned the
> duo, and then moved on, realizing they were drunk and minding their
> own business and harmless – number two on my list. They could have
> arrested them and when they got belligerent, “tasered” them, saving
> the one guy from a potential brain damaging blow to the head from a
> cement collision and resolving the situation – not the best option
> but better than a hospital stay. Apparently this dangerous situation
> called for backup and a physical confrontation.
>
>
>
> According the Santa Cruz police department there were 3 homicides, 33
> rapes, 83 robberies, 313 aggravated assaults, 527 burglaries, 2792
> acts of larceny, 264 auto thefts and 21 acts of arson. That makes 11
> of these types of crime per day. So I am just wondering if police time
> could be better spent on these types of crimes. Sitting on a bench
> drunk didn’t make the list for 2012 but there will be at least one
> offence for 2013. The good news is the Santa Cruz police department
> has launched Twitter and Facebook Pages and has a Mobile App for
> iPhone and Droid!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Back to the dynamic duo. So let me get this straight, there are two
> guys on a bench, drunk, but doing a whole lot of nothing, and not
> really in any condition to walk, let alone able to creating mayhem. So
> pretty much the sum total of their transgression is akin to speeding
> or jay walking – it appears to me these two guys were totally
> harmless…so, here’s the result, the police initiate a confrontation,
> then the situation escalates, the two become belligerent (they weren’t
> belligerent before the cops arrived, begging the question what’s the
> catalyst?). This results in a booking, hospital visit, jail time for
> one, costing the tax payers tens of thousands of dollars, issuing
> nuisance citations that will never be paid, generating arrest warrants
> (again costing more money), the officers will get paid 1.5 their pay
> for overtime and retire at 45 with a healthcare benefits and a
> generous pension…and the City of Santa Cruz gets sued into oblivion
> (again) by a smart young attorney …not to mention the guy got his
> face bashed in and potential brain damage and pain…and for what? Who
> wins here? The man was belligerent. Who gives a shit? My kids are
> belligerent and so are my employees. So what? Adults handle these
> situations with common sense. The new buzz issue these days is
> bullying, but this is worse than bullying, it’s brutality. The
> standard justification for acts like this is how hard the job of the
> police is – as if this justifies assault? Being a doctor is a hard
> job. Working in the fields is a hard job. Having a hard job doesn’t
> justify being an ass hole. This is crime creation, not law
> enforcement. And they could have just walked by.
>
> Posted by D. B. Loisel.NORSE’S NOTES:
Nicely put, Doug.
I wouldn’t suggest tasering, which can also be lethal and tends to be misused as curbside punishment for less-than-swift-compliance. But rather calling for a few more cops to help move the guy into the squad car.
The new strategy seems to be to use fear and punishment if people don’t fully cooperate, seems like.
I’m normally not a fan of megacopping on Pacific Avenue–I’ve seen half a dozen instances of it in two weeks around things like “leaning against the railing of the fence near the New Leaf Market” (an incident involving Brent Adams and Officer Ahlers), 4 squad cars blocking traffic on the street while a fifth parks across the street (near community TV) to handle one drunk on the sidewalk who’s already handcuffed (and may have also been slammed down–I got their late and his face was bleeding). Actually both these and a third happened on the same day–I witnessed the first, got a first hand account of the second, and a more distant account of the third–I think it was Friday April 5th.
Maybe there’s a “message” police are trying to send out to drunks similar to the message their vigilante cousins are sending out to homeless people: “get out of town or get hurt”. Just wonderin’.
Finally, the cops also often use this “drunk in public” charge to haul people in, seize their property, and sequester it for days–notably homeless people and their backpacks and blankets, when folks simply have an open container or are mildly buzzed and “have the wrong attitude”. They are then held in a cell for a few hours and released in the cold wee hours without charges.
It looked like Richard Hardy–the name of the man assaulted by Officer Vasquez–was perhaps too drunk to take care of himself–the actual definition of drunk in public, rather than the police misusage above. So perhaps he had justification, but what really tells is the subsequent behavior of the cops (“Are you all right, Richard?”) where they attempt to whitewash their brutality for the watching videocamera and the cover-up of the matter by the SCPD (not aware that Vasquez has been relieved of duty pending investigation). Also with the Copley decision of a decade ago, there’s no public revelation of any disciplinary consequences unless someone leaks it.
Hardy, by the way, was reportedly released from Dominican yesterday, but I’m not sure if that’s because they’re cheap, or because he’s truly recovered.
The aggravated anti-homeless climate in Santa Cruz (I got another report yesterday of 4 guys jumping a man named Gabriel as he headed for Cabrillo College–which you may have heard on the radio–report to be posted soon) is ramping up and solidifying this long-time police corruption.
I’m hoping to begin creating a video on-line library of such local incidents and turn them into a well-edited video that demonstrates both police brutality locally and the abusive anti-homeless laws to pass on the public in another of my (often seemingly ineffectual) Calls to Conscience.
Thanks for your analysis.
R
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: compassionman@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [huffsantacruz] Thoughts on Escalating Police Violence & in Santa Cruz
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:05:28 -0700
Unless we’re talking some new laws, jaywalking doesn’t mean not crossing at a crosswalk, but crossing in a block between two stop lights or obstructing traffic. Were you doing either? What’s the ordinance they cited?
From: compassionman@hotmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [huffsantacruz] Thoughts on Escalating Police Violence & in Santa Cruz
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:33:21 -0700
11pm officers winston and “coffy”?.. in front of new leaf as they were scaring off drunken street performers.
I crossed a vacant well lit street to pass by them. He recognized me from afar and said, “SIR!! COME HERE NOW!!”
….. and asked me to produce my ID. it was because i had crossed the street outside of the cross walk.
they both indicated that they knew about the police violence video.
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: compassionman@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [huffsantacruz] Thoughts on Escalating Police Violence & in Santa Cruz
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:23:35 -0700
Thanks, Brent. When and were did this happen–if you remember? Any video or further commentary? Number of officers involved, for instance. Time of day, etc. As well as the ultimate consequences (did the ticket show up in court?).
From: compassionman@hotmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [huffsantacruz] Thoughts on Escalating Police Violence & in Santa Cruz
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:21:05 -0700
i was given a ticket for Jay walking and officer Coffy tried to give me a ticket for an unregistered bike untilWinston told him that they don’t do that anymore because its illegal.
Video: Officer Vasquez slams drunk mans face to concrete
Here is some video i took the other night.
At about 1am on april 22, 2013 I rode my bike past two guys sitting passively on a bench at night downtown. Then a cop stopped and one-thing-led-to-another and the officer hand cuffed one of them and “spun him” … slamming the mans face with great force into the sidewalk.
State-wide Coalition Converges on the Capitol 4/22 and 4/23 for Homeless Bill of Rights hearing
NOTE BY NORSE: Santa Cruz really needs some constitutional counteraction against its own Downtown Ordinances. For a toxic selection of these nasty ordinances see “Deadly Downtown Ordinances–Updated” at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/08/29/18657087.php .
As homeless people are increasingly caught up in a bogus “Public Security” crackdown involving private security thugs harassing the homeless around city hall, the library, the levee, and in the Pogonip, documenting these abuses with video and audio–and posting the accounts becomes increasingly important. A good place to post is www.indybay.org/santacruz . Plus you-tube, of course.
A reminder to HUFF members and other interested folks that Keith McHenry, co-founder of Food Not Bombs, will be returning to Santa Cruz on Saturday to give a workshop/forum on the California Homeless Bill of Rights, creating a Homes Not Jails locally, and other activist civil rights issues impacting those outside. See http://www.indybay.org/
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 08:59:35 -0700
From: shoc_1@yahoo.com
Subject: State-wide Coalition Converges on the Capitol 4/22 and 4/23 for Homeless Bill of Rights hearing
To: shoc_1@yahoo.com
CC: pboden@wraphome.org
State-wide Coalition converges on the Capitol on April 22 and 23 before Homeless Bill of Rights Hearing
Homeless communities, grassroots organizations, and advocates across the state join together to ensure the passage of the Homeless Person’s Bill of Rights and Fairness Act (AB 5)
CONTACT:
Paula Lomazzi, SHOC Director
EVENTS:
Rally – North Steps of Capitol, April 22, 2:30 – 6 PM
Press Conference – North Steps Capitol, April 23, 7:30 or 8:15 AM
APRIL 12, 2013—Momentum for the Homeless Person’s Bill of Rights and Fairness Act is building steadily, with critical revisions to the proposed bill now complete and Judiciary Committee hearings scheduled for April 23rd. Hundreds of homeless rights activists from across California will rally in Sacramento on April 22nd
Assembly Bill 5 was introduced by Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco). “This bill,” he says, “is really about basic justice. People who are Homeless not only have to struggle with life on the street, they often have the indignity of being treated like criminals because they have nowhere to eat, sit, or sleep except in public. My bill is not about privilege. It’s about making sure they are treated equally before the law. I’m proud to be standing with, and for, anyone seeking justice.”
In a Western Regional Advocacy Project (WRAP) survey of 1,267 homeless people, 81% of participants reported that they were harassed by police for sleeping. In addition, 78% reported experiencing police harassment for sitting. Six hundred of these respondents were in California. Tickets for “status offenses” like sleeping or sitting often result in the arrest and imprisonment of homeless people.
With shelters filled to capacity and thousands of people on waiting lists for housing around the state, homeless people have no choice but to sleep, rest and eat in public places. Paula Lomazzi from Sacramento Homeless Organizing Committee said, “These are basic rights that allow all people to stay alive—things most of us get to take for granted, but which remain a daily challenge for many of the poorest members of our communities.”
“Laws that segregate, that make criminals of people based on their status rather than their behavior, or that prohibit certain people’s right to be in public spaces are not just sad relics from the past, ” says Paul Boden, Organizing Director of the Western Regional Advocacy Project (WRAP). “The California Homeless Bill of Rights is a response that will protect homeless people from discrimination and ensure their right to exist. This is not about special rights – this is about equal rights.”
Last year, Rhode Island became the first state to pass a statewide homeless people’s bill of rights. Building on the community organizing that led to this success, social justice organizations around the country have been working on bills that aim to protect the rights of homeless people. While the states of Vermont, Oregon, Connecticut and Missouri have already had bills introduced, California’s Bill – co-sponsored by the Western Regional Advocacy Project, Western Center on Law and Poverty, JERICHO: A Voice for Justice, and the East Bay Community law Center – is the first bill since Rhode Island’s to be heard in the state legislature. Judith Larson of Jericho said, “This is the essence of what Jericho was
Sacramento Homeless Organizing Committee
P.O. Box 952, Sacramento, CA 95812
Phone and Fax: (916)442-2156
www.sacshoc.org – http://homeward.wikispaces.com
Phone and Fax: (916)442-2156
www.sacshoc.org – http://homeward.wikispaces.com
Sleeping During the Day–Now a Crime in Santa Cruz?
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/04/16/18735297.php
ALERT: Two Arrested For “Being” in the Pogonip
by Robert Norse
Tuesday Apr 16th, 2013 5:07 PM
Tuesday Apr 16th, 2013 5:07 PM
I received the following information by phone a few minutes ago. The charges against the two arrested were not clear, though they may be something like “camping” (i.e. survival sleeping during the day–which is not illegal).
I just received a preliminary report from two of six people who were accosted by authorities in the Pogonip about an hour or two ago. Two others in the group–Freedom of Occupy Santa Cruz and Andrew–were arrested for failing to leave (the charge was unclear). Since it was during the day, the Pogonip was open. One of those I spoke with, Baba, told me that when he asked what their crime was and why they were being told to leave, one of the three officers (a ranger, a SCPD officer, and a sheriff) told him “what if a family with some children came down and saw you here?”
Baba noted that he first found this offensive with the implication that they were “unsightly” because of their appearance (youthful traveling alternative culture folks). Then on reflection he was even more deeply troubled because the officer’s comments implied that the area was open to families but not to “his kind”.
Baba noted that the officers did not confiscate any property, gave them time to move their stuff (including two dogs), and told them they could “go to some other city”. It was still not clear what Freedom and Andrew were arrested for, but I hope to learn more soon.
Freedom had widely announced her interest in convening a meeting to deal with safe and secure sleeping space for the 100 people denied shelter when the Winter Armory Shelter had its last night on April 14th-15th.
The weekly HUFF meeting, as described at http://www.indybay.org/
I’m attaching a history of criminalization of the homeless from WRAP (Western Regional Advocacy Project), a group of West Coast organizations fighting for the civil rights of those outside.
HUFFster denounces Santa Cruz County jail at protest
http://sinbarras.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/statement-of-solidarity-from-santa-cruz-homeless-united-for-friends-freedom-huff/
Statement of Solidarity from Santa Cruz Homeless United for Friends & Freedom (HUFF)
Posted on April 9, 2013 by sinbarras
Becky Johnson, one of the Santa Cruz 11 and an organizing member of HUFF, gave a wonderful speech at our Speakout + Rally on April 6th on local homeless issues and conditions in Santa Cruz County Jail. Below is the transcript, audio and video are coming soon:
When President Dwight D. Eisenhower left office in 1961, he warned “Beware the Military-Industrial Complex.” Today, it’s “Beware the Prison-Industrial Complex.” For prisons today have become big business in a country where manufacturing generally is suffering & unemployment rates are high.
Santa Cruz County is no exception.
For a jail to be profitable, it must be full. Nevermind that it’s paid for with taxpayer dollars. Our electives & appointees don’t care. For them, it is a job security program for police, judges, bailiffs, deputies, file clerks, probation officers and attorneys.
I myself have been fodder for this system with my “criminal” career: I am a convicted sidewalk hopscotch chalker, criminal songster, & in the case of the Santa Cruz Eleven, a suspected sign-holder & blogger. But what I want to talk about to you today is the criminalization of homelessness.
Currently in liberal, progressive Santa Cruz it is illegal to sit on a sidewalk less than 14 feet from a building. It’s illegal to sit on a park bench with your feet up. The Sleeping Ban, MC 6.36.010 section a, outlaws the act of sleeping anywhere out of doors or in a vehicle between the hours of 11PM & 8:30AM within the City Limits.
A separate provision outlaws the use of a blanket between 11PM – 8:30AM out of doors. Hacky-sacking, hop-scotching, and tossing your car keys to your husband are illegal acts on Pacific Ave., the shopping-Mecca where all the City Council members friends have stores.
Let me tell you about Gary Johnson, a homeless man, and an activist. Gary was arrested 4 times within 3 days for BEING on the County property in front of the Court House after 7PM. He was charged with trespassing. When he pointed out that he had a sign which said “A legacy of Cruelty MC 6.36.010 a, PC 647 ( e )”
and that the trespassing code has an exception for “traditional public forums,” the DA turned around and charged him with misdemeanor illegal lodging. He was sentenced to 2 years in jail for these 4 acts of sleeping. Recently he lost his appeal of the sentence before Judges Symons & Burdick.
What homeless person can pay a fine of $162 for sleeping in a cardboard box? None of them. And the authorities know this. But, they can bill you and me for the salary of the police officer who cited or arrested them. They bill for the time the officer spends in court. They bill for any public defender, but with most infraction crimes, the person charged has no right to one.
This jail is full of homeless people! And many who were marginally housed when they were arrested, will be homeless upon their release.
The Drug War fuels many of these arrests. So do mandatory minimums and the 3-Strikes law. But we could cut down on a HUGE amount of local incarceration if we repealed a whole-host of laws which frankly are selectively enforced against the poor and homeless.
When I spent the night here in “G” Dorm in County Jail, I met women there who should NOT have been there. There was one woman, so mentally-challenged that the other inmates had to tell her to put her underwear on. One mother of four with chronic intractable pain from a car accident, was jailed for the crime of supplementing her inadequate pain relief with heroin.
In jail, despite a known diagnosis of chronic intractable pain due to past injury, for which she had been treated with addictive pain medications, she was forced to quit “Cold Turkey”. Her only relief were hot showers. One day, in serious pain, she was pulled from an “unauthorized” shower dripping wet & thrown into an icy holding cell. While in there, she watched as deputies watched “prison porn” on their monitors where women prisoners were tormented & sexually abused.
Another woman was serving 3 months of a 6-month sentence for assault when she herself was assaulted by three women in Jade Street Park after hours. The women beat her over the head with a frying pan (she showed me the scar on the top of her head). They stole her laptop computer. As they fled the park, she called 911 on her cellphone. Police and an ambulance arrived while the three women were still in the area. Terry, the only injured person, was sent to the hospital.
She was arrested in the emergency ward. The three women had convinced the police that Terry had attacked THEM! When by pure chance, her brother’s roommate was able to buy her laptop back (the smoking gun) the DA ignored it.
Since she was still charged with felony assault, Terry was forced to plea “no contest” to a misdemeanor. Judge Adrianne Symons ok’ed that one.
Another form of abuse is the arbitrary nature of what charges are filed and what the how much bail is set. When Gabriella Ripley-Phipps was arrested in December of 2011 for basically protesting the destruction of the Occupy Santa Cruz encampment, she was charged with “obstructing an officer” and bail was set at $25,000. When shooting suspect, Jeremy Goulet was arrested for breaking into his female co-workers home and sexually assaulting her in her own bed, his bail was set at $250.
In the case of Kenneth Massei, the man who was falsely arrested for stealing flowers from the memorial for the 2 slain police officers, bail was set at $5000. He was forced to spend 18 days in jail here until his attorney showed the receipt for the flowers that he had in his possession when he was first jailed.
Isaac Collins, the only person arrested last year at the UCSC 420 event, was jailed here for 82 grams of chocolate & butterscotch brownies that tested positive for marijuana. Collins is black. The deputy that arrested him said he picked Collins out of the large crowd of pretty much all-day law-breaking because “he was wearing a very colorful shirt.”
So in conclusion, we need to End the Drug War! End the war on the poor! End mandatory minimums! End 3-Strikes! Repeal the Sleeping Ban, Blanket Ban, and laws which were written and are enforced specifically to be us
NOTE FROM NORSE; Becky Johnson’s blog can be found at http://
ed against homeless people. Justice demands that we don’t stop until this work is done. Thank you.
Reports of Attacks on the Homeless in Santa Cruz
The following comment is part of a larger thread on Santa Cruz Indymedia at https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/03/22/18734073.php?show_comments=1#18734215 which criticizes the tepid and vague response of establishment liberals and “progressives” to the attacks on needle exchange, homeless services, homeless people, the counterculture, and the right to use public spaces.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/03/22/18734073.php?show_comments=1#18734254
http://www.indybay.org/
Yesterday at the Red Church’s Monday evening meal, I did my usual interviewing of folks.
A number of neural reports (i.e. police haven’t been harassing as much as usual).
HIGH-TAIL IT TO THE HIGHWAY YOU HOMELESS HACKEYSACKERS!
However a major report involves an incident at the City Parking Lot across from the Elm St. Mission and the Cafe Pergolesi last week when somewhewre between 6 and 10 squad cars reportedly corralled and ticketed a dozen or so people (I have the impression they were counterculture/traveller/homeless-looking or just perhaps economic underclass folks). And ticketed them to stop a hackeysack game some of them were playing. The charge: the old Parking Lot Panic law–MC 9.64.020 (“Trespass” on a public parking lot–the law that makes it illegal to be in a parking lot unless you’re walking directly through or parking or retrieving your vehicle). I received at least three independent angry reports on this.
ASSAULTS WITH SKATEBOARD AND SPITTLE
Another report was of Sam-I-Am (both directly from him and from upset companions earlier) being assaulted by four men who seemed in the troll-busting mode because what they said was “I want your hat” (a humiliation ritual) and they refused to give it to them. He was assaulted with a skateboard, and hospitalized with a fractured spine–or so he said as he stood in line at the meal in some apparent pain (but without, he said, adequate pain medication from Dominican).
A third report was of a man (who wished to remain anonymous) flying a sign out at the Mission St. Safeway. First three youths spat on him as they drove by. Then a guy stopped. He went over thinking it was perhaps a food donation or somesuch. The guy reportedly ostentatiously got out of his car, took out his cell phone and loudly announce he was calling the police and reporting that the homeless man was kicking his car. He then demanded the homeless man leave (or “leave town”, not sure which) according to this report.
Two women lying on the beach during the day were told by a security guard that they had been there “too long” and “had to leave” by their report or he would “call the police”. Or so they said.
PHONY JAYWALKING TICKET
And then there was the incident I witnessed on Friday night right outside Andy’s Auto on Pacific: The daughter of Shalom Compst and Marilyn Dreampeace, a woman in her 40’s, walked across Pacific Avenue from the Metro bus side to near where I was standing. A police officer came up to her and demanded to know why she’d done that.
It is not illegal to cross Pacific Avenue anywhere between Laurel St. and the Town Clock unless (a) you are obstructing a vehicle, or (b) the police have set up a traffic-controlled intersection with a stoplight or traffic cop. Such has been my undertanding as a person who has weathered jaywalking tickets in the past.
He gave her a $100-200 jaywalking ticket anyway in spite of her pleas.
Had I known this was a jaywalking ticket as it was being written, I would have so announced it to each passerby and asked them to stop and wait as witnesses (though it was dark and around 8:30 at night). One can write this off to nubie officer ignorance or over-zealotry (I didn’t recognize the cop, whose name I was told was Clauer or something like that).
GRANT STREET PUBLIC MEETING: NO HOMELESS ALLOWED?
I also received a report from Billy Q that a recent Grant Street park public meeting had homeless people driven away by police last week. The TBSC website describes the homeless-free event favorably at http://takebacksantacruz.com/city-leaders-and-neighbors-rally-for-grant-street-park-public-safety/ /. This abusive exclusionary process replicates what happened at the Sharon Collins memorial last summer at San Lorenzo Park. And if the account is accurate, the SCPD or officers of same, are direct agents.
It could be I’m getting lifted by the hysteria of the times around these incidents, but they seem to be growing more serious and more numerous: vigilante, security guard, and police harassment and actual threats and assaults.
MARCH OF THE HOMELESS-APHOBES
There’s a “Families First” march today from Harvey West to City Hall for 5 PM according to the TBSC website.[See http://takebacksantacruz.com/ ]. Since there’s no evening City Council meeting (only one at 3 PM and supposedly one at 5 PM for Oral Communication), it appears Families First–which I’m assuming is a TBSC-front group–is planning to ignore the politicians, who surf the waves of the moment, and mobilize homeless-haters, fearful-neighbors, frustrated workers, and gentrification gurus from all around the town to create an even more powerful lobbying group.
I’ll be at the 5 PM City Council Oral Communications (2 minutes and shut up)–which may be held significantly earlier since there doesn’t seem to be that much on the afternoon agenda. And then covering the TBSC (which I’ve taken to calling Take Over Santa Cruz) march for FRSC and to voice my own views.
KEEP WATCH AND FIGHT BACK AGAINST RISING FASCISM
Please post reports of any incidents you experience or witness. Video and audio are particularly helpful (sorry I don’t have much). I did play the Jaywalking incident on Free Radio on Sunday. It’s archived on the HUFF website if you search through the 3-24 show towards the end, but I’ll post its location more clearly on the descriptions section soon.
Include time, place, names and descriptions, dialogue overheard, step-by-step account, etc. if you have any of these details. The more specific the better.
A number of neural reports (i.e. police haven’t been harassing as much as usual).
HIGH-TAIL IT TO THE HIGHWAY YOU HOMELESS HACKEYSACKERS!
However a major report involves an incident at the City Parking Lot across from the Elm St. Mission and the Cafe Pergolesi last week when somewhewre between 6 and 10 squad cars reportedly corralled and ticketed a dozen or so people (I have the impression they were counterculture/traveller/
ASSAULTS WITH SKATEBOARD AND SPITTLE
Another report was of Sam-I-Am (both directly from him and from upset companions earlier) being assaulted by four men who seemed in the troll-busting mode because what they said was “I want your hat” (a humiliation ritual) and they refused to give it to them. He was assaulted with a skateboard, and hospitalized with a fractured spine–or so he said as he stood in line at the meal in some apparent pain (but without, he said, adequate pain medication from Dominican).
A third report was of a man (who wished to remain anonymous) flying a sign out at the Mission St. Safeway. First three youths spat on him as they drove by. Then a guy stopped. He went over thinking it was perhaps a food donation or somesuch. The guy reportedly ostentatiously got out of his car, took out his cell phone and loudly announce he was calling the police and reporting that the homeless man was kicking his car. He then demanded the homeless man leave (or “leave town”, not sure which) according to this report.
Two women lying on the beach during the day were told by a security guard that they had been there “too long” and “had to leave” by their report or he would “call the police”. Or so they said.
PHONY JAYWALKING TICKET
And then there was the incident I witnessed on Friday night right outside Andy’s Auto on Pacific: The daughter of Shalom Compst and Marilyn Dreampeace, a woman in her 40’s, walked across Pacific Avenue from the Metro bus side to near where I was standing. A police officer came up to her and demanded to know why she’d done that.
It is not illegal to cross Pacific Avenue anywhere between Laurel St. and the Town Clock unless (a) you are obstructing a vehicle, or (b) the police have set up a traffic-controlled intersection with a stoplight or traffic cop. Such has been my undertanding as a person who has weathered jaywalking tickets in the past.
He gave her a $100-200 jaywalking ticket anyway in spite of her pleas.
Had I known this was a jaywalking ticket as it was being written, I would have so announced it to each passerby and asked them to stop and wait as witnesses (though it was dark and around 8:30 at night). One can write this off to nubie officer ignorance or over-zealotry (I didn’t recognize the cop, whose name I was told was Clauer or something like that).
GRANT STREET PUBLIC MEETING: NO HOMELESS ALLOWED?
I also received a report from Billy Q that a recent Grant Street park public meeting had homeless people driven away by police last week. The TBSC website describes the homeless-free event favorably at http://takebacksantacruz.com/
It could be I’m getting lifted by the hysteria of the times around these incidents, but they seem to be growing more serious and more numerous: vigilante, security guard, and police harassment and actual threats and assaults.
MARCH OF THE HOMELESS-APHOBES
There’s a “Families First” march today from Harvey West to City Hall for 5 PM according to the TBSC website.[See http://takebacksantacruz.com/ ]. Since there’s no evening City Council meeting (only one at 3 PM and supposedly one at 5 PM for Oral Communication), it appears Families First–which I’m assuming is a TBSC-front group–is planning to ignore the politicians, who surf the waves of the moment, and mobilize homeless-haters, fearful-neighbors, frustrated workers, and gentrification gurus from all around the town to create an even more powerful lobbying group.
I’ll be at the 5 PM City Council Oral Communications (2 minutes and shut up)–which may be held significantly earlier since there doesn’t seem to be that much on the afternoon agenda. And then covering the TBSC (which I’ve taken to calling Take Over Santa Cruz) march for FRSC and to voice my own views.
KEEP WATCH AND FIGHT BACK AGAINST RISING FASCISM
Please post reports of any incidents you experience or witness. Video and audio are particularly helpful (sorry I don’t have much). I did play the Jaywalking incident on Free Radio on Sunday. It’s archived on the HUFF website if you search through the 3-24 show towards the end, but I’ll post its location more clearly on the descriptions section soon.
Include time, place, names and descriptions, dialogue overheard, step-by-step account, etc. if you have any of these details. The more specific the better.
Flower Felony: 18 Days in Jail, Thanks to a Take Back Santa Cruz Mob
Charges dismissed against man accused of stealing flowers from memorial to fallen Santa Cruz police officers
By Cathy Kelly
Posted: 03/21/2013 04:42:31 PM PDT
Click photo to enlarge
Ken Maffei ( SCS )
SANTA CRUZ — Charges were dropped Thursday against a Santa Cruz man accused of stealing flowers from a memorial to fallen police detectives Sgt. Loran “Butch” Baker and Elizabeth Butler.
As attorneys said in court, Kenneth Eugene Maffei, 53, bought the flowers March 1 and had been leaving a box of Allbright’s doughnuts at the North Branciforte Avenue memorial to the fallen officers. He lingered there for about 45 minutes when a woman spotted him picking the flowers up and walking off.
The woman called police, who stopped him. Maffei was too intoxicated to explain and made inconsistent statements, defense and prosecution lawyers said. He was arrested and charged with theft and public intoxication.
Maffei had been on his way to a motel with the flowers “for a lady friend,” defense attorneys said. They said he wrote “R.I.P.” on the $1 box of doughnuts.
His arraignment hearing March 5 drew more than a dozen Take Back Santa Cruz members as Judge John Gallagher kept him in County Jail with bail set at $5,000. Maffei was in custody for 18 days, said Larry Biggam of Biggam, Christensen & Minsloff, the primary public defender firm in the county.
“This case was a classic ‘rush to judgment’ — from the arrest, to the high bail (at arrest), to the harsh judgments in the media,” Biggam said. “Mr. Maffei has been demonized and has served 18 days in jail for a crime he did not do.
“Yes, these are difficult and sensitive times in our
community, and I understand people’s concerns.
But we need to address those concerns with facts, not fear, and with fairness, not prejudgments.”
Maffei was nearby when Baker and Butler were killed by a suspect Feb. 26. He went to the street-side memorial to pay his respects, Biggam said.
Another defense attorney, Jack Lamar Jr., came to court with a letter from Erika Hearon of the Davenport Resource Service Center stating Maffei had been a “valuable volunteer” for several years.
Biggam said Maffei was not a “transient,” as police stated, but has lived in Santa Cruz for 31 years.
The defense found a receipt for the flowers among Maffei’s belongings in County Jail, Lamar said.
District Attorney Bob Lee said follow-up investigation raised doubts as to Maffei’s guilt and that his office was “doing its due diligence to determine what had happened.” He said once prosecutors got the new evidence from the defense, it prompted a thorough investigation by inspectors who concluded the flowers belonged to Maffei.
Prosecutor Jennifer Hutchinson requested both misdemeanor charges against Maffei be dismissed. She said searching Maffei’s personal belongings in jail “is something we can’t do.”
“From the DA’s Office, this is a pursuit of truth,” she said.
Judge John Salazar said the District Attorney’s Office could have waited until the eve of the trial to drop the charges, and he said he thought it “was not an unreasonable conclusion” to believe Maffei had stolen the flowers given the circumstances and initial evidence.
“It’s a good reminder that sometimes people charged did not commit the crime,” Salazar said. “And we have a system that finds that out, at least eventually.”
Maffei attended the hearing, as a free man. When questioned outside court, he smiled and said he “probably shouldn’t say anything.”
Follow Sentinel reporter Cathy Kelly on Twitter
COMMENTS:
Brent Adams · Video Journalist, Filmmaker at Subcommondante Films comments:
tbsc has their priorities wrong. They are creating and harvesting pain and fear and using it for a political agenda that hurts our community instead of helps it.
More than a dozen tbsc were in court for this?? Is this a “public safety issue”??
I think not. Where are they when homeless people are being cited for just sleeping? Where are they when people’s personal belongings are being trashed??
There is no place for 90% of homeless people to sleep tonight. Census stats show that 70% of local homeless are from here. And yet, they go after basic sustenance food programs at the Homeless Services Center.. is that about Public Safety?
Santa Cruz Sanctuary Camp. Join the conversation.
A special salute to Judge John Salazar for wisely reminding us of the generosity of the D.A.’s office in allowing this flower-filcher to be released after only 18 days when he could (and surely should) have been held until trial.
And to Judge John (“Justice is my Middle Name”) Gallagher for standing firm against any hysterical or hasty action and wisely putting Maffei, the petunia pincher, behind bars on $5000 bail.
Another to the D.A.’s office which has shown in other cases—like my own Santa Cruz Eleven prosecution—that money is no object in Keeping Santa Cruz Safe from marijuana smokers, homeless campers, and political protesters. Though it may cost tens of thousands more in the upcoming trials of the remaining 4 and caused one D.A. To flee town—Rebekah Young left for Texas last Friday– D.A. Bob Lee has assured us that the more trivial cases of murder, assault, and burglary aren’t being stalled because of his focus on ending the “culture of tolerance”.
We can’t be sure, but let’s give the benefit of the doubt to the Sheriff’s office for holding this rhododendron robber in stir where he belonged instead of embarrassing everyone by revealing the receipt (probably forged anyway).
And a shout-out to the Public Defenders who took only 18 days to find the receipt that showed the apparent innocence of this geranium-grabbing Maffei. These hard-working attorneys were plenty busy saving the County money by squeezing guilty pleas out of the riffraff cluttering up the court docket.
Not to mention the deep research done by the Sentinel in its even-handed investigation of this case (as shown by its wise commentary on the Menace of Illegal Campsites, the Dangers of Needle Exchange, and, of course, the Perils of Keeping Santa Cruz Weird)!
Let’s not forget the ever-vigilant SCPD who saw through Maffei’s clever act in concealing his obvious drunkenness from a crowd of mourners for 45 minutes and had him arrested for being unable to take care of himself (the legal definition of drunk in public). Puzzling, of course, is the disappearance of the surely-justified Drunk-in-Public charge. Perhaps this is another example of our soft-heated drug-tolerating, homeless-enabling community! We know the SCPD would never have labeled a person drunk and unable to take care of themselves without justification!
Finally, a slap on the back to the patriots at Take Back Santa Cruz who roused the crowd at court to demand the judicious Judge Gallagher hold this rose-loving rogue in a safe place. I understand they’ll be advancing the Keep Santa Cruz Straight campaign at City Council, making our community safe from needle-strewing homeless junkie-loving flower thieves and the bureaucrats who protect them.
One can’t but marvel at their broader many-pronged strategy to slash away the homeless cluttering the Santa Cruz landscape like so many toxic weeds: “starve ’em out” by cutting the funding of homeless services; “slap ’em awake” with more police sweeps; culminating in the “strip ’em naked” plan—with Parks and Rec crews confiscating their criminal clothing.
But while I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with those who want to Keep Santa Cruz Safe, I must insist that we show our own tolerance and good sense: Keep TBSC, the D.A., the Sentinel, the Courts, the Sheriffs, and the Public Defender’s Office Weird!
EXTENSIVE FURTHER COMMENTS AT: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_22843345/charges-dismissed-against-man-accused-stealing-flowers-from .
Latest Update in the Corrspondence Around the Rights of Street Artists with City Attorney Barisone
NOTE TO ALL: I’ve just renewed my request to City Attorney John Barisone to clarify what I was told he clarified several years ago when he advised a street artist. That artist brought him a copy of the White v. City of Sparks decision protecting the right of artists to sell their art on the street without permits, and Barisone reportedly agreed, stopping a potential lawsuit.
However, as mentioned in the earlier e-mail below, police have ramped up their campaign against performers and artists (or those they choose to disfavor), and a clear quick response has become more important.
Please let me now if you’ve experienced or heard any problems with police/host/security guard harassment downtown for political, cultural, artistic, or musical activity in public spaces. Give as many specifics as possible (time, date, cops names, conversation involved, citation (if any), place, etc. etc.).
Thanks,
Robert Norse
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:09:29 -0800
John: I just received word from the street artist who got the bogus panhandling citation that he wasn’t going to fight it, but would do community service. However, he also intends to put price tags on his work, given the White v. City of Sparks decision.
Please let me know what your thoughts are before he gets another ticket.
Thanks,
Robert
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: jbarisone@abc-law.com
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:39:52 -0800
Thanks, John.
From: JBarisone@abc-law.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:01:01 -0800
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
I haven’t gotten to this yet.
From: Robert Norse [mailto:rnorse3@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:51 PM
To: John Barisone
Cc: Robin the rightsfinder; Jonathan (!) Gettleman; David Beauvais; lioness@got.net; Ed Frey; J.M. Brown; Alexis of Pier 5; Ricardo Lopez; Joe the strummer; Tom Noddy; Brent Adams; Coral (!!!) Brune; Free; John Malkin
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
John: Did you receive this e-mail?
If so, can you advise me of whether the SCPD current acknowledges and follows the City of Sparks v. White exemption of artists from permits and their right to display price tags on their work.
It’s been nearly a week. I’m concerned you may have mislaid my e-mail.
Thanks,
R
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: jbarisone@abc-law.com
CC: circulation999now@yahoo.com; jonathangettleman@yahoo.com; davebeau@pacbell.net; lioness@got.net; edwinfrey@hotmail.com; jammbrow@gmail.com; alexis@pier5law.com; riclopez35@yahoo.com; talljar@gmail.com; tnoddy@aol.com; compassionman@hotmail.com; coralbrune@hotmail.com; overthrowproperty@yahoo.com; jsmalkin@hotmail.com
Subject: City of Sparks v. White
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:05:27 -0800
John:
You may remember Robin coming in to secure an agreement from you that he could resume displaying his artwork on the sidewalk without a permit and without harassment from the SCPD even though he attached price tags. This was several years ago in response to the City of Sparks v. White (http://
Several artists have told me that “Hosts” and SCPD officers have been telling them they’ll be cited if they do what you apparently oked for Robin. I know Robin also requested an explicit change in the law and to my knowledge and his you never recommended or created it.
I want to know if you’ve change your position here and now regard art work as not First Amendment-protected (as far as explicit pricing goes). What is the current policy and direction to the SCPD?
This clarification is particularly important because some police officers are not merely banning explicit pricing, but also claiming that showing artwork without a business license is “panhandling” even if it’s done for donation in accord with the explicit exemption of MC 9.10.010(a) which states “A person is not soliciting for purposes of this chapter when he or she passively displays a sign or places a collection container on the sidewalk pursuant to which he or she receives monetary offerings in appreciation for his or her original artwork or for entertainment or a street performance he or she provides.”
Please let me know what the status of the White decision is regarding city policy as well as assurance that MC 9.10.010(a) is still active law.
Hope you are well.
Robert
(831-423-4833)
Destruction of Local Homeless Survival Camps in Felton: Another Disgraceful Episode
Norse’s Notes: Instead of ordering that the campsites be cleaned up, the real motivation of the vigilantes and sheriffs seems to be to drive away any and all homeless survival campers.
Too bad no one documented the three truckloads of “trash” with video. When that was done in Fresno, the City lost a two million dollar lawsuit, and actually had to start at least giving token acknowledgment of state law regarding seized property.
More to the point would be establishing emergency campgrounds for folks who need to be outdoors (95% of whom have no legal shelter). Even more addressing the underlying conditions that create this crisis.
If folks were serious about clean-up’s, the county would provide portapotties, dumpsters, trashbags, and legalization of clean camps. If they were serious about ending unsafe needle disposal, they’d take local initiatives to end the insane Drug Prohibition war and at the very least expand (rather than contract) harm-reduction programs like needle exchange.
While it’s always encouraging to see community members getting together to clean-up areas that the city and county decline to address, that must not involve scapegoating a whole class of people. T.J. Magallanes, who created The Clean Team website, has said and written this repeatedly. But “Take Back Santa Cruz” type hardliners prefer to use the homeless as a political football here and blame them as a means of attacking a power structure (that deserves to be attacked, incidentally).
Screaming about “tolerance for drugs” and “illegal” homeless camps (when virtually all survival camping is illegal) is just blind bigotry and the kind of desperation that ensues when folks fail to identify the real enemies who run the show.
The KSBW news brief on this suggests the sweeps are “controversial” only in that they “aren’t effective” and folks seem to keep coming back. Sort of reminds me of the homeless = vermin approach, used to describe insurgents, terrorists, 1930’s Jews, etc. Dehumanizing people is a nice way of covering your fascist ass.
It’s also a pity that the “service providers” in the area didn’t speak out against this destruction of homeless survival camps. Maintaining the illusion that there are shelter alternatives when there are not. The sheriffs don’t even pretend there are. And won’t be even if the pretty-pretty 180-180 program gets fully funded.
There are thousands of homeless in the county. Is the plan to drive them all out into the rain and make them internal refugees?
I wrote more in the comments that follow this article, which is primarily window-dressing for the sheriffs and demonization of the campers, though as of yet those comments haven’t appeared (other than one brief sentence). See http://www.santacruzsentinel.
Three truckloads of trash hauled from Felton campsites
By Stephen Baxter
Posted: 02/07/2013 07:05:45 PM PST
FELTON — Three deputies and four Santa Cruz County Jail inmates hauled out three truckloads of trash from illegal campsites near Zayante Creek and the San Lorenzo River on Thursday.
Responding to some residents’ complaints and a pile of garbage and human waste at the Graham Hill Road Bridge over the San Lorenzo River, deputies posted notices to vacate the campsites in January.
Since then, much of the debris was removed or swept down the river with last month’s rain, sheriff’s Sgt. John Habermehl said.
Thursday, they hauled out dirty clothing, alcohol bottles, bicycle parts and a broken kayak, among other items.
“It’s not so much that somebody decided to pitch a tent,” Habermehl said. “We try to address the criminal behavior — the illegal dumping, the drug and alcohol issues, and the waste in our rivers.”
He added that the cleanups are a matter of maintenance rather than a long-term solution: “If we don’t do something about what’s out there, it’s just going to get worse.”
The action follows similar Sheriff’s Office sweeps near Highway 9 in September and by Santa Cruz police during the fall and summer of 2012.
No one was cited and no syringes or other drug paraphernalia were found on Thursday, deputies said. The inmates who participated volunteered from the Rountree Detention Center, a medium-security facility.
At a second cleanup site under the Conference Drive Bridge at Zayante Creek, deputies were
surprised to find a relatively clean area with several trash bags left by campers.
Light rain fell on the crew as it loaded food wrappers and dirty clothing into a Santa Cruz County flatbed pickup and a truck loaned by the Mount Hermon Christian Conference Center.
Don Cox, a homeless 53-year-old Air Force veteran, watched the crew work in the rain. He said he camped in the Felton area for years and noticed new people who came from Santa Cruz because of recent cleanups in that city.
“A bunch of them who’ve come down here are drug addicts and thieves,” Cox said.
Having been a mechanic and tow truck driver, he said he is trying to attend job-training classes at Cabrillo College and find a place to live with his veteran benefits.
“It’s not like I’ve chosen to be out here and be a bum,” he said. “I’m too old to be on the streets.”
“They’re really kind of picking on us,” he said of Thursday’s cleanup.
Another woman, Amanda Livingston, 22, saw the deputies and inmates work under the Graham Hill Bridge.
She said one of the men went to Santa Cruz to collect a check Thursday morning, so she scrambled to round up his gear and a bag of prescription drugs before it was removed.
“I’ve been telling him that they’re going to clear the camp,” she said. “He didn’t believe me.”
Originally from Michigan, Livingston said the bridge offered her some shelter during the rain storms earlier in the winter. She and others cooked, drank and tried to stay dry, she said.
Above the bridge, some employees at nearby businesses said they appreciated the cleanup.
“I think it’s definitely necessary but it’s pretty lame that it has to be done in the first place,” said 21-year-old Adam Pomianowski, who works at Budget Truck Rental at 6440 Graham Hill Road. “This is a river running through our little town. I’m glad someone’s paying attention.”
MORE COMMENTS at: http://www.santacruzsentinel.