On August 29, 1970, 30,000 people marched through East Los Angeles protesting the Vietnam War and racism. Three people died that day: L.A. Times reporter Ruben Salazar who was shot through the head with a tear gas projectile fired by a Sheriff. Angel Diaz and Brown Beret Lyn Ward were also killed by the Sheriffs. At a previous Chicano Moratorium demonstration, Sephardic Jewish immigrant Gustav Montag was shot and killed.
On August 28, 2010 the National Chicano Moratorium Committee will hold a march from Belvedere Park to Ruben Salazar Park (Whittier & Alma) and rally with speakers, music, dance, and informational booths. For further info, call Jaime Cruz 323.687.0963 or Xenaro Ayala 818.365.6534.
My friends Irv Sutley, Eric Sorensen, Aron Morton Kay, Miguel Angel Perez, Gary Kast, Jaime Cruz and many others were there on August 29, 1970. Here are some of their reminiscences:
Aron Morton Kay: i was at the chicano moratorium march and rally on 8/29/70 helping green power distribute free sandwiches when the fireworks began to commence as the la county sheriffs attacked the march as it arrived at salazar park
Gary Kast: I remember vividly that day. I was in valley with girl friend when i heard on radio a riot had broken out. I went down immediatly but could only get to border of “riot zone” on , I think Eastern and Whittier Blvd( Atlantic?? not good with ELOS) . Anyways, B&W full of sheriffs in riot gear were everywhere and tossed a brick through the windshield of one and cops fly out and everyone scatters and we were taken in by neighbors running down a street. it was great energy in the crowd.
Irv Sutley: Irv was staffing the Peace and Freedom Party table promoting the candidacy of gubernatorial candidate Ricardo Romo (first Chicano on the ballot for Governor since 1905). When the sheriffs attacked, Irv finally found refuge on Soto street at the home of George and July Luna Mount.
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that some people’s feathers are going to get ruffled by the establishment of an Islamic Center or a Mosque or whatever the New York Muslim community wants to put near the site of the attack of September 11, 2001. If they’re concerned, it’s only because they’re committing the logical fallacy known as argumentum ad hominem (circumstantial) as well as hasty generalization. Just because some Muslims are terrorists doesn’t mean that all Muslims are terrorists anymore than any other group.
But aside from that whole argument, forget people’s feelings. If I lived or worked near Ground Zero, which remains a target of Islamic extremists and terrorists, I’d love to have a Mosque or Islamic center nearby. I would feel a lot safer with it being in the vicinity. Terrorists may be misguided in their tactics from a general American perspective, but that doesn’t make them stupid. They would realize that another attack at Ground Zero that wound up damaging or destroying a Mosque or Islamic Center and killed or injured fellow Muslims would be a public relations disaster with the people they are trying to get support from. Of course, American Muslims were killed during the 911 attacks and American Muslims were amongst the first responders to assist the injured and trapped.
“A defendant has an absolute constitutional right not to testify. He or she may rely on the state of the evidence and argue that the People have failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. Do not consider, for any reason at all, the fact that the defendant did not testify. Do not discuss that fact during your deliberations or let it influence your decision in any way.” — Standard California Jury Instruction on the right to remain silent, Jury Instruction #355.
The right to remain silent and not testify in a criminal prosecution is guaranteed to defendants by the United States and California Constitutions and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. You’d think that an average juror with at least a high school education would understand that they’re not supposed to hold against a defendant their failure to testify or to even consider their failure to testify in determining whether the prosecution has proved its case against the defendant. It’s not up to the defendant to prove his/her innocence.
Recently I had to track down jurors after a conviction on felony charges and interview them. This is what one juror stated in a sworn declaration she agreed to sign. Thankfully, she was truthful: “”…we also wondered why the defendant didn’t testify on his own behalf. It was remarkable that he didn’t say anything in his own behalf.”
I’ve got my fingers crossed now in hopes the defendant gets a new trial.
Late in life Frederick wrote that what he was proudest of was not his achievements in the fight to end slavery or to seek justice for African Americans. It was his role at the Seneca Falls Convention for women’s rights where he gave the keynote speech in favor of the right to vote at the request of Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The only controversial issue at the convention, women’s suffrage only passed 28-25 and Douglass was one of the best orators of his time. He was proud of his role because it was completely altruistic: as a male he had nothing to gain.
One of the roles I’m proud of is that I can say that I’m probably one of the only straight males on the planet Earth who has been actively supporting LGBTI rights for forty (40) years. Most LGBTI people cannot even say that they’ve been actively supporting their own civil rights for that long.
In 1970, I founded a debate club at Pacoima Jr. High (now Pacoima Middle School). One girl wanted to join the club. Other males were objecting and were accusing her of being a Lesbian. She denied it. I insisted she be allowed to join and said I didn’t care if she was a Lesbian or not: she had a right to be in the club. That same year I argued on behalf of the rights of Gays, Lesbians, and Trans people. I argued that eighth grade sex education classes should teach that these were perfectly reasonable, normal lifestyles. I got into an argument with my ninth grade English teacher Mrs. Haberland, who conceded that maybe we should get rid of the laws against Gays and Lesbians, but she thought that cross dressing in public was disgusting and it should remain illegal. I of course took the opposite position on Transvestism.
In 1978, I was campaigning for Lieutenant Governor at University of California at San Diego when I was approached by the girl I’d stuck up for at Pacoima Jr. High. She was now out of the closet, active in support of LGBTI rights, and reminded me of how I was the only guy who stuck up for her eight (8) years earlier. I hadn’t even remembered until she reminded me but now I’ll never forget. Ever. As long as I live I’ll be proud of my record of supporting my LGBTI brothers and sisters in the movement for their civil rights.
Now that same sex marriage seems to be on its way to being legally vindicated by Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision, I can feel deep pride in my role of support for many LGBTI causes and issues over four (4) decades of activism. It was written by Ambrose Bierce that “Radicalism is the conservativism of tomorrow, injected into the affairs of today.” What was once a radical and scorned position that I took in 1970 when I campaigned for the Peace and Freedom Party’s “Long Beach Platform” adopted that year is now mainstream, accepted, and even a bit conservative in some circles.
“Cautious, careful people, always casting about to preserve their reputation and social standing, never can bring about a reform. Those who are really in earnest must be willing to be anything or nothing in the world’s estimation, and publicly and privately, in season and out, avow their sympathy with despised and persecuted ideas and their advocates, and bear the consequences…” — Susan B. Anthony
Because of unrest by youth in a Roma (Gypsy) community in France, amongst a group of Roma who’ve lived in France for centuries (“the Traveling People”), President Sarkozy has ordered the expulsion of Roma immigrants who had nothing to do with the events in question. During World War II the Nazi’s exterminated nearly a million Roma along with the six million Jews they killed. Roma and Jews went side by side into the gas chambers.
So, like Arizona where some immigrants from Mexico commit crimes, while the overwhelming majority are law abiding, the legislature passes the law to try to drive out decent, hard working immigrants, even though statistics in Arizona demonstrate that crime has decreased in areas where immigrants have settled.
If anybody is wondering why some people think that bigotry is at the bottom of immigration policies the world over, this is why. If anybody is wondering why I care about the Gypsies the reason is two-fold. First, I’m Jewish. Being part of the so-called “chosen people” is not an honor, it’s a burden. The meaning of being “chosen” is to do the bidding of god on Earth and establish justice in the world; it’s an obligation, not a reward. Second, by adoption into the Moshwara Tribe of the Roma people into the family of the late Duey Stevens (Rombaro or King of the Moshwara) I am Roma and proud of it.
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were. Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee…” — John Donne
There is a controversy within the private investigative and security industry over whether CALI (California Association of Licensed Investigators, the world’s largest group of private detectives) should reduce funding of its longtime national partner, NCISS (National Council of Investigative and Security Services) and start funding ISPLA, an organization made up of former dissidents of NCISS. These moves are vigorously being pushed by CALI VP of Administration Ed Saucerman.
Seeing the Forest and the Trees
Undoubtedly you’ve all heard the old saying about not being able to “see the forest for the trees.” As private investigators, we all need to see things from various perspectives.
One way to view the situation of having rival professional organizations who both formulate their legislative agendas separately is to compare the situation of private investigators to other professions. One of them that clearly illustrates the problem is the legislative conundrum that chiropractors find themselves in.
In this debate it has been pointed out that in the evolution of the relationship between PICA and CALI to the point where it is today there have been positive developments. But will that evolution continue to be positive? Maybe. Some also might see storm clouds on the horizon. In biological evolutionary terms, some species are successful and some become extinct, but all species live in the inter-relationship with all other species of plants, animals, protists, as well as the natural environment they live in. The choices that “species” of professional organizations choose may also lead to success as well as to extinction or marginalization, at the risk of engaging in a Social Darwinistic analogy.
There are two prevalent schools of thought in chiropractic health care: Palmerists and non-Palmerists is the easiest way to characterize the situation. Palmerists, the smaller school of thought, have their own local, state and national associations as do the larger non-Palmerists. The Palmerists are opposed to the use of drugs, such as pain killers, while their non-Palmerist opponents think that they should be able to administer pain reducers in order to make some bone manipulations less painful, just as an MD or a DDS would in order to make a medical or dental procedure less painful. After all, the first two years of chiropractic school are virtually identical to the training of an MD in medical school.
Because the Palmerists object to this being allowed, every time the larger group attempts to legislate for their members’ interests, the legislative process balks since the smaller group won’t give a consensus opinion on the bill. In essence they wind up with veto power in the process.
As we know from the fight over our MCE legislation, there are some issues where the legislature isn’t swayed by the influence of the smaller organization. There may be some critical mass where the legislature takes a smaller group seriously in a profession and when it doesn’t, subjectively determined by the particular facts. Obviously, since not one single vote went against MCE in the legislature, the influence of PICA’s opposition was between negligible and nil on the issue.
However, that may not always be the case. PICA may lose or gain credibility in the future. If it both gains credibility AND simultaneously becomes obstreperous vis a vis CALI’s legislative agenda (doing the latter may be a strategy for growth of a professional organization, i.e., become parasitic towards the larger rival) that could bode ill for the ability of CALI to accomplish its legislative goals.
So, the same situation we now face in California could be faced nationally if ISPLA gains credibility and membership at the expense of NCISS. It is far better that the industry speak with one voice rather than two when dealing with congress and executive branch regulatory agencies. For that matter, should we ever have the occasion to deal with the judiciary in a lawsuit for declaratory relief against legislation, imagine the nightmare of an organization competing with NCISS filing an amicus brief or complaint in intervention against the NCISS position. Nobody can guarantee that this is a scenario that can’t occur, anymore than anybody can guarantee that ISPLA would not wind up lobbying with a position opposed to that of NCISS and CALI.
To me, the best wisdom on the subject was stated a long time ago by Chief Little Turtle of the Miami Indians: “If our people fight one tribe at a time, we will be cut off like the fingers from a hand; but if we join together, we will make a powerful fist.”
This is one of the most incredible scenarios I’ve ever seen. Just got a report from LULAC’s National Convention (League of United Latin American Citizens) in Albuquerque. I’m really glad I didn’t go. I’ve been suffering from various stress related ailments and if I were there I’d be way stressed out.
Here’s the background. In order to take disciplinary action in LULAC there needs to be a vote by the National Executive Board. Without any such vote, LULAC National Legal Advisor — who dubs himself general counsel — arbitrarily suspended two officers of LULAC. He does it in an email that conveniently winds up in the hands of the political opponents of the two LULAC officers before they even are aware of it and doesn’t even bother to send it to the one that it specifically attacks.
So, Luis Roberto Vera, Jr., the attorney, gets named as an individual defendant in a lawsuit that was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on July 14, 2010, Case No. BC 441643, Luevano vs Diaz et al. One would think that once he knew he was personally named as a defendant, along with National LULAC, he would step aside and recuse himself from any dealings with the people that are suing him for, amongst other things, Libel per se and Invasion of Privacy. But NOOOOO! He’s right there now at the convention telling people what to do vis a vis figuring out ways to disqualify the people that are suing him from acting as delegates to the convention and running for office.
I wonder what the Texas State Bar Association will say about this state of affairs?
You can see the lawsuit (which will likely be amended as soon as the Plaintiffs are back in town) at:
Like most Jews I’ve heard and studied much about the World War II Holocaust brought about by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. But until I saw the movie Defiance starring Daniel Craig and Liev Schreiber, about the Bielski brothers who organized a partisan unit in support of the Soviet forces it was always an abstraction and not a personal matter about specific family members to me. Early on in the movie it turns out that one of the brothers had left his wife and child in Gorodieshe, Ukraine and that 3,000 Jews had been massacred there by the Nazis.
Gorodieshe was my maternal grandmother’s home town.
When I met my friend and private investigator colleague, Igor Timofayev from Kiev in the Ukraine, at the Las Vegas World Investigators Conference, we were comparing familial notes and it turned out that both our grandmothers were from the Gorodieshe region. Other than that, I knew nothing about the area. Igor pointed out that it was a heavily Jewish region to me, something I hadn’t known before.
Anyway, Defiance is a great tale of courageous people who took on the Nazis and saved about 1,200 Jews in the process.
Fox newsperson Patti Ballaz was awarded $1.7 million by a Los Angeles Superior Court jury for being attacked by the LAPD at a 2007 Mayday pro-immigration rights march. The jury deadlocked on an award for fellow Fox employee Christina Gonzalez and awarded $39,000 to KPCC ace reporter Patricia Nazario who was physically attacked by LAPD Officer Jesse Reyes. Reyes has twice had “Pitchess Motions” granted to release portions of his prior complaint history to criminal defense lawyers when judges decided that the information for was relevant to the defense.
So why the disparity between Patti’s $1.7 million and Patricia’s $39,000?
Maybe it has something to do with the cowardly actions of her employer. During the incident, Nazario was on the telephone talking to a manager at the Pasadena based radio station. Nothing in the conversation involved any confidential sources of information–which would have been covered by California’s “shield law” that protects the confidentiality of reporter’s sources for news stories. In spite of the complete irrelevancy of the law, KPCC’s attorneys invoked it to prevent their employee from testifying on Nazario’s behalf. Her testimony would have clearly refuted the contentions of Officer Reyes that supposedly, demonstrators were getting rocks out of Nazario’s knapsack to throw at police and that there was justification for him attacking her.
Of course, if Reyes’ contentions are true, why did he just hit her, knocking her off her feet, but not arrest her?
City Attorney Trutanich and Mayor Villaraigosa might be comfortable with an officer like that on the city’s payroll and believe that it’s okay to proceed to trial with such a fairy tale for testimony, but I think that the average person might think that you might as well try to sell the public on the existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
Anyway, remember President John F. Kennedy’s book, “Profiles in Courage?” KPCC’s actions in preventing their employee from testifying for Nazario is nothing less than a profile in cowardice. Maybe they were concerned that the Westside limousine liberal crowd they depend on for funding would be offended by taking on City Hall.
Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Kennedy, Alito, Scalia, Stevens, and Thomas wrote an opinion in Humanitarian Law Project vs. Holder that essentially says that the Patriot Act’s prohibition on giving “material support” to groups designated by the Executive Branch of government as foreign terrorist organizations (FTO) includes giving legal advice or training the organizations in conflict resolution so that they can explore non-violent alternatives to achieve their aims. Justices Breyer, Ginzburg and Sotomayor dissented from the opinion, attacking the majority as undermining the First Amendment.
Note the following. Congress passed the Patriot Act and previous laws setting up the criteria by which the executive branch of government, headed by the President, can designate organizations as FTO. One of the groups designated by the executive branch as FTO is the Mujaheddin e Khalq (MEK) which fights to theocratic dictatorship of Iran. Many Americans and many Iranian Americans see MEK and other organizations fighting for secularism and democracy in Iran as being heroes. In fact, at one time, a majority of members of the House of Representatives signed a letter to the State Department asking it to lift its designation of MEK as an FTO!
To see more information about how insane this state of affairs is, check out my position paper on MEK at http://www.janbtucker.com/IdeaOpinions.html
