Gang-Injunction Once Again Grinds To a Halt

Yolo County prosecutors have to go back to the drawing board yet again after another state appeals court struck down very similar language.

Jay-Allen Eisen who is one of several defense attorneys representing some of those named as alleged Broderick Boys said:

"These (gang injunction) cases seem to be coordinated. The complaints look pretty much the same around the state... "They all ask for the same thing, so as the court rules one part of one of these injunctions is okay or is bad, that affects the other cases... They don't tell you what 'outside' means. In your own front yard, in your own backyard? The curfew language is so vague that nobody can understand it."

As I have suggested for sometime on this blog, the West Sacramento Gang Injunction pushes up against constitutionality by its very nature. Instead of trying people for what they have done and can be proven to have done, it attempts to somehow distinguish people in advance and then permanently enjoin them for participating in activities that are permissible to all other citizens.

The problem now is that in order to cover a broad range of activities, the laws have had to be very vague. This had led to legal challenges and portions of laws being thrown out.

For instance, the last gang-injunction was so broad that it only named one individual by name and that individual did not even live in West Sacramento. So the individuals affected eventually by the injunction had no opportunity to challenge it in a court of law.

They also used a portion of the law known as unincorporated association in order to tie gang members together in some sort of common bond, again as a means to make their very association illegal and thus enjoin them from specific activities.

The tragedy of all of this is that there are enough laws on the books already that make gang activities illegal. The difficulty apparently with following those laws is that they have to actually wait for a crime to be committed and then to convict an individual in a court of law.

It would seem to me that if you want to use the law as a preventative rather than reactive measure here, then you simply need to prove with the burden of proof on the prosecution that the individual is an actual and current gang member and if you can prove that, then you have a good chance of having the law upheld.

There seems to be resistance for that. Proponents of this and other gang injunctions have argued that the law has worked and reduced crime. I would counter that the law does not work when it gets repeatedly thrown out by various courts.

And having laws that are written vary similarly are a double-edged sword. On the one hand, there is clearly a joint and collective understanding of how laws need to be written in order to pass constitutional muster.

On the other hand, what we see here is that a law that is thrown out in one location, affects many other locations. When the West Sacramento law got thrown out last summer primarily due to a failure to properly notice defendants, another clause--the unincorporated association clause--got thrown out as well which caused a number of jurisdictions to face either similar challenges or to hastily re-write their laws.

In the end, attempts to skirt constitutional protections put both law breakers and law abiders in peril.

Critics have argued that some of those specifically named are not involved in criminal activity or gangs. Some have turned their lives around. Others are already in prison.

So while there are many who swear by it, one has to wonder if they have actually achieved what they have hoped to achieve and in the meantime, they have to re-write the law yet again--probably not for the last time.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Case of Alleged West Sacramento Police Brutality Goes to Court

I received a press release the other day about this West Sacramento case of police brutality. The incident occurred over two years ago, one of the brothers was so badly hurt that they are just now able to even stand trial or testify. They are charged with resisting arrest and and two counts of battery of a police officer. The brothers have filed a civil suit in federal court alleging that they are victims of racial violence and excessive force by the police officers.

The police claim they had grounds for arrest on suspicion of use of a controlled substance. However, according to the Sacramento Bee, "No drugs were found on either man, according to testimony, and no drugs were detected in their systems."

According to the Sacramento Bee article published on Wednesday:

"Defense attorneys Anthony Palik and Hector Salitrero said Fermin Galvan-Magana, 31, and his brother Ernesto Galvan-Magana, 30, had not been able to come to trial until now because the younger brother suffered debilitating head injuries.

"Ernesto was in a coma 1 1/2 months and he was in the hospital for two months," Salitrero told the jury in his opening statement.

According to testimony, officers struck Ernesto Galvan-Magana three times with a Taser gun and then several times with their batons.

Salitrero described the officers' actions as excessive and racially motivated. He said the baton blows caused Ernesto Galvan-Magana's skull to collapse.

"There were no less than eight strikes to Ernesto's head, any one of which could have been lethal," Salitrero said.

Yolo County prosecutors argued the officers' actions were appropriate to subdue the man, who they said was kicking, punching and out of control."

The police's version of event is recounted in the Sacramento Bee article from Wednesday:

"The encounter began about 3:20 a.m., police Detective Donald Schlie testified, after he saw a car parked on a dead-end street behind a middle school near a levee in the Bryte neighborhood.

The area near Riverbank Road and Toddhunter Avenue is known for late-night crime, he said, and he radioed for his partner in another car to join him.

Schlie testified that he then saw two men at the bottom of the levee, about 25 feet away.

He said he engaged Ernesto and Fermin Galvan-Magana – who live nearby – in casual conversation, explaining that he was not attempting an arrest.

"I asked them, 'How is it going?'" Schlie said.

The detective said Ernesto Galvan-Magana was acting as if he was under the influence of a controlled substance – that he was sweaty and was making fast movements. He said he told the two men to raise their hands, first in English then in Spanish.

Ernesto Galvan-Magana failed to comply after several requests, Schlie said.

The detective said he fought with Ernesto Galvan-Magana for about four minutes, trying to subdue him with his Taser and then his baton, striking him in the legs and arms.

Other officers were called to the scene to assist, he said.

Fermin Galvan-Magana, who yelled at the officers to stop, also was struck with a baton and needed medical care, according to testimony."

Here's the full press release:

"The trial of Ernesto and Fermin Galvan-Magana - one knocked unconscious and another struck at so many times by West Sacramento Police batons that he suffered multiple fractures of his face and skull - continues here Wednesday in Dept. 4 of Yolo County Superior Court.

Both brothers have alleged excessive force - Ernesto was in a coma for nearly two months - and claim that one arresting officer had tattoos of a "racial nature" on the middle fingers of both his hands. The court has confirmed the presence of tattoos.

Although police admit the brothers were not breaking any laws when stopped in June of 2005, Ernesto is charged with felony resisting arrest and two counts of battery of a police officer. Fermin faces only resisting arrest charges, according to the defense.

Evidence provided by defense lawyers note that although West Sacramento police said they had grounds for arrest for suspicion of use of a controlled substance in June of 2005, subsequent investigations revealed defendants had no drugs and medical tests did not show the presence of a controlled substance,

Both defendants have alleged they are victims of racial violence and excessive force by the West Sacramento Police Dept., said Palik, who has also filed a civil suit in federal court alleging injuries caused by the use of excessive force by the same officers.

The officers said they never aimed their baton blows above Ernesto's shoulders, but police reports note he was struck 30 times with batons causing seven to eight fractures of his skull and face. The prosecution's own medical expert confirms at least one, and possibly two, skull fractures could only have been caused by baton strikes aimed at Ernesto's head.

Fermin Galvan was knocked unconscious after, he said, an officer struck him in the head and back. Despite the officer's testimony he never struck Fermin above the belt, the prosecution's own expert witness on police tactics testified unequivocally at the preliminary hearing that the elongated bruise on Fermin's back could only have been caused by a baton strike."

The Vanguard will be closely watching developments in this case.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

West Sacramento Police Under Fire in Arrest of Two Black Port Workers

On Thursday, a massive protest of 150 International Longshore and Warehouse Union members, who gathered outside the Yolo County courthouse in protest of an arraignment hearing of two of their fellow members charged with obstruction of justice. It was described to me by one of observer as "the largest and best organized protest that anyone could remember seeing in Woodland." A bus full of Longshoremen turned out with a flat-bed truck which served as the stage. The case was continued to the 22nd of this month.

The following is the description of the incident from the union website:

"On August 23, West Sacramento police and private security guards viciously attacked, maced and arrested two Local 10 brothers, Jason Ruffin #101168 and Aaron Harrison #101167, coming back to work on the SSA terminal after lunch. When the guards insisted on searching their car, the longshoremen questioned their authority to do so and called the Local 10 business agent. While one was talking on the phone to the BA and without provocation, they were assaulted, dragged from the car, handcuffed, jailed and charged with “trespassing” and “obstructing a police officer”.

How the hell can longshoremen be “trespassing”, returning to work after lunch, having already shown their PMA ID cards to guards at the terminal. Was it racial profiling because the two longshoremen were black? Authorities citing a new maritime security regulation that permits vehicle inspection doesn’t mean maritime workers can’t question it. It doesn’t take away a union member’s right to call his union business agent, And it certainly doesn’t give authorities, private or government, the right to assault and arrest you without provocation."

According to their attorney quoted in the Woodland Daily Democrat:

"I think this is the result of a big misunderstanding at the port of West Sacramento that day. As the court process progresses, that will be established."

However the former ILWU Local 10 president sees this as more nefarious:

"They roughed them up and maced them and they think they have the right to do that. You have a clear case of police brutality and racial profiling."

According to the Daily Democrat:

"This is just more fodder against the West Sac PD," said Rev. Ashiya Odeye, director of the Justice Reform Coalition, a Sacramento-based civil rights advocacy group. "This just shows what they've been doing to the citizens of West Sacramento. But now they have made the mistake of doing this to members of a union."

Odeye, along with other activists, have been mounting a grass-roots opposition to an injunction being sought by the Yolo County District Attorney's office against a local gang in West Sacramento in part because of what Odeye said were rampant reports of police brutality against innocent residents in the area.

The Deputy Chief of Police for West Sacramento Police Department gives a very different story as to what happened.

According to the Daily Democrat:

Henry Serrano, deputy chief of police for the West Sacramento Police Department, said that's not what happened.

Serrano said Harrison and Ruffin normally work at a port in Oakland, and were new faces in West Sacramento that day.

He said they were then randomly selected for search by port security upon their return from lunch. The search was performed in accordance with Coast Guard requirements - not because of their race, Serrano said.

"Every so many vehicles they check," Serrano said. "So that's where they were confused about that."

Harrison and Ruffin refused to be searched, which resulted in West Sacramento police officers coming to the port to assist security personnel.

The police ordered the two port workers to clear the driveway if they would not submit to the search - they refused to move, Serrano said.

"For over five-and-a-half minutes our officers try and talk to these individuals and try to explain to them, 'you don't have to be searched if you don't want, but you can't just sit here, blocking the drive,'" Serrano said. "There's no compliance and eventually the officers tell them they need to get out of the car."

Failing to comply with what Serrano said was a lawful order, Harrison and Ruffin were removed from their car by the officers.

Serrano said the entire incident lasted no more than several seconds as the driver was squirted with pepper spray and taken from the vehicle.

"The passenger wasn't even touched until he was handcuffed," Serrano said. "They were not being compliant with a lawful order, which is subject to Coast Guard regulations."

Serrano added that a port security videotape of the incident, which is currently in evidence, verifies his version of events.

Future protests are planned if the charges against these two workers are not dropped.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting