Magdaleno

I must tell you that it was humbling for me to be at the conference of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty Held in Kentucky Jan. 14-17: Celebrating with Heroes. Everyplace I looked there were men and women who are doing incredible work to protect the lives of others and make our society better.

They are helping our society to heal.

We have been led to believe that the only heroes are those that wear uniforms when in fact some of the REAL HEROES are folks who have never worn a uniform but who perform miracles and risk everything more than once. Some Day a President when does his or her State of the Union Address will have an Abolitionist, Peace Activist, Feminist, Environmentalist, Immigrant Rights Activist, or an LGBTQ Spokesperson sitting with the First Lady and the president would recognize these heroes as being an important part of the fabric of America.

At the NCADP Conference there were exonerees, murder victim’s families, and the families of death row inmates, lawyers, paralegals, religious folks, atheists, organizers, and many more. They came in all shapes, sizes, ages, from all over the country and some from other countries. They were common people who do incredible uncommon acts of humanity.

I got to be the MC [MASTER OF CEREMONIES OR MEXICAN IN CHARGE] for the awards dinner where we heard from the voices of New Mexico and their wonderful victory, we got to hear lawyers like Steve Bright, Tony Amsterdam and others, we got to hear Sister Helen as she recognized singer Steve Earle who moved our minds and hearts with his music…

As I looked around the hall and saw so many great individuals, I had to remind myself that there were in fact thousands of others across this country that who were also working hard to make our society more civil and just…and for some reason could not be in the room with us that night.

I am blessed to be part of such a wonderful movement that makes us all better because we give of ourselves …
So to all the Heroes and Sheroes I want to let you know that we celebrate your lives and dreams …thank you for all you do and dream.

Steve Earle update

Steve was in Seattle on this past Friday to perform at the Moore theatre. He came by my office at the SOCIAL JUSTICE FUND … and then along with Zeke from my office we went to lunch at FARESTART a great restaurant where they train homeless people to be Chefs.

Later that night Maru Villapando and I went to his concert and got to meet Steve backstage. In the concert he talked about peace, Immigrant Rights and then during the Encore he sang Ellis Unit One ..before singing this wonderful song he gave a ten minute spirited talk about abolition. Note. You can google this song and hear Steve sing this at a concert.

It was nice to see Amnesty International there at the Moore Theatre with their petitions for many human rights situations around the world.

MY VIEW OF THE NEWS

a. Help Haiti
b. Top Ten Health Care Actions to Take
c. The Manchurian Candidates
d. You Need More Friends

HELP HAITI

There is much that can be done …and you can make a difference …every little bit helps..you can contact my good Friend Herns Marcelin who is a professor at University of Miami and spends much of his time in his home land Haiti working with the poor, students and building dreams. You can reach him at ‘LMarcel2@med.miami.edu’.

When I was in Haiti, Herns took me to the poorest barrio in Haiti and I got to see the people that he works with.

And you can also help Haiti through FAVACA by contacting rebecca@favaca.org 305.470.5034 www.favaca.org.FAVACA This is my favorite organization that has a long and honored history of working with Haiti.

BUY THIS SHIRT TO HELP A SMALL CHURCH THAT SUPPORTS THE POOR IN HAITI

You can purchase this shirt and others by visiting Progressive Rags the owner of this business is an good friend of mine and who has done years of work protecting the human rights of activists in Haiti.

Take a stand in solidarity with the people of Haiti! Half of proceeds from the sale of this shirt will go to the feeding program for children at St Clare’s Church, Tiplas Kazo, Port-au-Prince.

The program was started in March 2000 by our good friend the late Father Gerard Jean-Juste with help from Margaret Trost of the What If ? Foundation.

Part of the proceeds will also go to support the work of the South Florida Haiti Solidarity Committee, which supports the popular movement in Haiti in its struggle for democracy and social justice.

And if you would like cards or a poster of this image of the poster HAITI…MISSION POSSIBLE please contact FAVACA.ORG. Favaca is a leader in working with Non-profits
inside of Haiti.

TOP TEN THINGS DEMOCRATS SHOULD DO BEFORE ABANDONING AMBITIOUS HEALTH CARE REFORM

by Matt Miller, The Huffington Post

1. Work (in a bipartisan way, of course) with the National Rifle Association to arm America’s 50 million uninsured and give them a ticket to Washington.

2. Require every senior Wall Street banker to personally cover 1000 uninsured families (cost: just $13 million a year!)

3. If Conan can be paid $30 million not to host The Tonight Show, can’t some Democratic billionaire offer Scott Brown $31 million (one dollar for every uninsured American who stands to get covered by the bill) not to take his seat, forcing another special election in Massachusetts?

4. Ask China to demand health care’s passage because we need its deficit reduction to start paying them back all the money we’ve borrowed.

5. Pass it with 59 votes as an act of civil disobedience, let Republicans sue, and take the tyranny of the minority to the court of public opinion.

6. Bring back Hillary to negotiate a deal. She’s rested, she’s ready, and she learned her lesson in 1994.

7. Tell Republicans you’ll sign any plan they offer that the CBO certifies will cover at least 30 million of the uninsured.

8. Run wall-to-wall ads featuring Scott Brown’s nude centerfold until he says “uncle.”

9. Promise to run wall-to-wall ads featuring Scott Brown’s nude centerfold if he signs on.

10. Ask Congress to put the Bob Dole-Howard Baker-Tom Daschle bipartisan blueprint for universal coverage (at http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/) to an up-or-down vote. Seriously.

Matt Miller is the host of the public radio program “Left, Right & Center,” and the author of The Tyranny of Dead Ideas, just out in paperback

Manchurian Candidates: Supreme Court allows China and others unlimited spending in US elections

Thursday, January 21, 2010

By Greg Palast | Updated from the original report for AlterNet

In today’s Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court ruled that corporations should be treated the same as “natural persons”, i.e. humans. Well, in that case, expect the Supreme Court to next rule that Wal-Mart can run for President.

The ruling, which junks federal laws that now bar corporations from stuffing campaign coffers, will not, as progressives fear, cause an avalanche of corporate cash into politics. Sadly, that’s already happened: we have been snowed under by tens of millions of dollars given through corporate PACs and “bundling” of individual contributions from corporate pay-rollers.
The Court’s decision is far, far more dangerous to U.S. democracy. Think: Manchurian candidates.

I’m losing sleep over the millions — or billions — of dollars that could flood into our elections from ARAMCO, the Saudi Oil corporation’s U.S. unit; or from the maker of “New Order” fashions, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. Or from Bin Laden Construction corporation. Or Bin Laden Destruction Corporation.

Right now, corporations can give loads of loot through PACs. While this money stinks (Barack Obama took none of it), anyone can go through a PAC’s federal disclosure filing and see the name of every individual who put money into it. And every contributor must be a citizen of the USA.

But under today’s Supreme Court ruling that corporations can support candidates without limit, there is nothing that stops, say, a Delaware-incorporated handmaiden of the Burmese junta from picking a Congressman or two with a cache of loot masked by a corporate alias.

Candidate Barack Obama was one sharp speaker, but he would not have been heard, and certainly would not have won, without the astonishing outpouring of donations from two million Americans. It was an unprecedented uprising-by-PayPal, overwhelming the old fat-cat sources of funding.

Well, kiss that small-donor revolution goodbye. Under the Court’s new rules, progressive list serves won’t stand a chance against the resources of new “citizens” such as CNOOC, the China National Offshore Oil Corporation. Maybe UBS (United Bank of Switzerland), which faces U.S. criminal prosecution and a billion-dollar fine for fraud, might be tempted to invest in a few Senate seats. As would XYZ Corporation, whose owners remain hidden by “street names.”

George Bush’s former Solicitor General Ted Olson argued the case to the court on behalf of Citizens United, a corporate front that funded an attack on Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primary. Olson’s wife died on September 11, 2001 on the hijacked airliner that hit the Pentagon. Maybe it was a bit crude of me, but I contacted Olson’s office to ask how much “Al Qaeda, Inc.” should be allowed to donate to support the election of his local congressman.

Olson has not responded.

The danger of foreign loot loading into U.S. campaigns, not much noted in the media chat about the Citizens case, was the first concern raised by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who asked about opening the door to “mega-corporations” owned by foreign governments. Olson offered Ginsburg a fudge, that Congress might be able to prohibit foreign corporations from making donations, though Olson made clear he thought any such restriction a bad idea.

Tara Malloy, attorney with the Campaign Legal Center of Washington D.C. says corporations will now have more rights than people. Only United States citizens may donate or influence campaigns, but a foreign government can, veiled behind a corporate treasury, dump money into ballot battles.

Malloy also noted that under the law today, human-people, as opposed to corporate-people, may only give $2,300 to a presidential campaign. But hedge fund billionaires, for example, who typically operate through dozens of corporate vessels, may now give unlimited sums through each of these “unnatural” creatures.

And once the Taliban incorporates in Delaware, they could ante up for the best democracy money can buy.

In July, the Chinese government, in preparation for President Obama’s visit, held diplomatic discussions in which they skirted issues of human rights and Tibet. Notably, the Chinese, who hold a $2 trillion mortgage on our Treasury, raised concerns about the cost of Obama’s health care reform bill. Would our nervous Chinese landlords have an interest in buying the White House for an opponent of government spending such as Gov. Palin? Ya betcha!

The potential for foreign infiltration of what remains of our democracy is an adjunct of the fact that the source and control money from corporate treasuries (unlike registered PACs), is necessarily hidden. Who the heck are the real stockholders? Or as Butch asked Sundance, “Who are these guys?”
We’ll never know.

Hidden money funding, whether foreign or domestic, is the new venom that the Court has injected into the system by its expansive decision in Citizens United.

We’ve been there. The 1994 election brought Newt Gingrich to power in a GOP takeover of the Congress funded by a very strange source.

Congressional investigators found that in crucial swing races, Democrats had fallen victim to a flood of last-minute attack ads funded by a group called, “Coalition for Our Children’s Future.” The $25 million that paid for those ads came, not from concerned parents, but from a corporation called “Triad Inc.”

Evidence suggests Triad Inc. was the front for the ultra-right-wing billionaire Koch Brothers and their private petroleum company, Koch Industries. Had the corporate connection been proven, the Kochs and their corporation could have faced indictment under federal election law. As of today, such money-poisoned politicking has become legit.

So it’s not just un-Americans we need to fear but the Polluter-Americans, Pharma-mericans, Bank-Americans and Hedge-Americans that could manipulate campaigns while hidden behind corporate veils. And if so, our future elections, while nominally a contest between Republicans and Democrats, may in fact come down to a three-way battle between China, Saudi Arabia and Goldman Sachs.

Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestseller The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.” Palast investigated Triad Inc. for The Guardian (UK). View Palast’s reports for BBC TV and Democracy Now! at www.gregpalast.com.

TIME TO INCREASE YOUR POOL OF FRIENDS

We all need to find a way to include more people in our circles..it will open up our lives to new and interesting individuals who are out there waiting to be invited in..

Me being a real live introvert have a hard time making new friends..… but once the ice is broken it is wonderful.. I am always searching for a connection to this new person and then once it is made it gets most exciting….let me know how you do in reaching out to new worlds.

My best
leno

ALEX SANCHEZ WINS BAIL

By Tom Hayden
 For The Nation

LOS ANGELES. Jan. 13. U.S. Judge Manuel Real granted Alex Sanchez bail after a closed ninety-minute session with law enforcement and civic officials today. The former gang member and founder of Homies Unidos is expected to be freed in ten days after posting $2 million property and sureties.

NOW FOR MY VIEW OF THE NEWS

a. Alex Sanchez Wins Bail

b. Haiti

c. The Cat Wedding

d. The Mayor

e. Avatar

f. Make ‘em laugh

——————————————————————————————

ALEX SANCHEZ WINS BAIL

By Tom Hayden
 For The Nation

LOS ANGELES. Jan. 13. U.S. Judge Manuel Real granted Alex Sanchez bail after a closed ninety-minute session with law enforcement and civic officials today. The former gang member and founder of Homies Unidos is expected to be freed in ten days after posting $2 million property and sureties. 

Sanchez still faces conspiracy charges with 23 others rounded up by the FBI in a government blitz using federal racketeering laws against alleged Mara Salvatrucha [MS] members. The trial is scheduled for October in Los Angeles.

A beaming Oscar Sanchez, the younger brother of Alex Sanchez, praised the ruling by Real, which he said “underlines the judge’s finding that Alex is not a danger to the community nor a flight risk. We believe he is in fact a great asset to communities like ours across the country.”

Supporters of Sanchez, organized as wearealex.org, were jubilant in many cities where pressure campaigns have been mounted.

The decision was seen as a victory for gang intervention workers, many of whom have attended the LA proceedings since June. 

The hearing was unprecedented in the memory of many courtroom experts. Former US prosecutor Robert Garcia, now head of the non-profit City Project here, could not recall a closed bail hearing in his decades of experience. Civil liberties attorneys were mulling a possible challenge to the nature of the proceeding.

But Sanchez chose to waive his rights to a public hearing. The transcript of testimony given in the proceeding is sealed, and the participants sworn to silence.

 Nevertheless, much of the story can be pieced together from independent sources. Judge Real changed course last week following an order from a 9th Circuit panel rejecting the grounds of his initial denial of bail. At the January 6th hearing he proposed a novel meeting of lawyers and law enforcement experts to discuss whether any evidence showed Sanchez to be an active gang member, danger to the community or flight risk over the past decade.

The prosecutors filed publicly its notice of available witnesses on Tuesday, identifying their slate as FBI Acting Special Agent Robert Clark, a former member of an MS-13, Mexican Mafia and 18th Street gangs task force, Captain Justin Eisenberg, a top officer in the LAPD’s gang and narcotics unit, who once was an officer in the Rampart Division gang impact team [known as CRASH until changed after the police scandal of the early Nineties], and Bruce Riordan, chief of the City Attorney’s gang division. 

The Sanchez defense of available witnesses were under seal.

So far it is publicly unknown what transpired in the courtroom. 

As the hearing ended, several witnesses left the building without press notice. Then Sanchez, wearing chains and white prison garb, surrounded by guards, walked quietly out, head down. Seeing him, NPR reporter Mandolit Delbarco said “hello Alex” and was sharply admonished by one of the security officers, who commanded “No communications!”.

The scene in the hallway was not a hopeful one. 

A minute later, Bensinger exited the courtroom, his face flushed with intensity. He rushed towards a side conference room with a trickle of Sanchez supporters following in suspense. Known for refusing any press interviews, he turned abruptly before disappearing into the privacy of the office. The NPR reporter was the lone reporter standing at the door. “Do you know what happened?”, Bensinger asked, then blurted out, “Alex got bail And I cannot comment further.”

EARTHQUAKE IN HAITI

The other day–about two weeks ago–I did the most absent-minded thing of the year. I had so many things on my mind, and I forgot what I was doing. I went to Starbucks needing a large coffee, when I got to my office as I was setting things down at my desk. I dropped my bag on the floor and then this huge thermos of half and half fell out of my bag with a tinging metal sound. I had walked out of Starbucks with their half-and-half thermos. The next thing I know is that half-and-half is spilling out all over the carpet in my office, and somehow my coffee has spilled all over my keyboard and desk. I must have bumped it as I tried to move things around …

I hurriedly tried to clean up some of the mess.

I was going nuts. I had an international conference call waiting for me, and immediately after that a meeting with a donor.

I had ruined a lot of cards I was mailing to members, ruined my key board and both my floor and desk were a super mess.

We called our landlord, and they said that they would look after the carpet and during the day I continued to clean my desk, so that half-and-half morning was most interesting.

I finally got enough courage and took the creamer back to star bucks and they thought it was funny.

I can turn a normal day into a disaster…

NOW FOR MY VIEW OF THE NEWS

a. The Judge Gets Real, But Why?
b. Death penalty kills budgets
c. Honor the heroes.
d. NCADP conference JAN.14-17
e. MLK DAY JAN. 18
f. The New Year
————————————————————



January 6, 2010

The Judge Gets Real, But Why?

Tom Hayden

The federal judge’s order means that LA’s top gang reduction officials will be subpoenaed to state what they know of Alex Sanchez.

After weeks of protests alleging judicial bias, the gang conspiracy case against Alex Sanchez was transferred to the jurisdiction of a new federal judge.

In an unexpected turn, federal Judge Manuel Real today ordered prosecutors and defense attorneys in the Alex Sanchez case to request that top LA city and police officials advise the court about the gang peacemaker’s public activity over the past decade in a special hearing on January 13. Real repeatedly questioned the prosecution’s evidence for the first time in the proceeding’s six-month history.

Lawyers and advocates scrambled to make sense of the judge’s order, which must be met in six days. Professor Beatriz Cortez, coordinator of the nation’s first Central American Studies program at Cal State Northridge, was among the skeptics. “How will this hearing be conducted, will it be secret, will the community be left out?” she asked. Others claimed the judge was going through the motions in response to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent admonishing. The Sanchez family and official defense team expressed guarded optimism about the development.

Taken literally, the judge’s order means that the city’s top gang reduction official, Guillermo Cespedes, and a top LAPD gang expert appointed by the new Chief Charles Beck would be asked, or even subpoenaed, to state what they know about Alex Sanchez from the past decade. Since city and police officials have often collaborated with Sanchez in the past, the public record might place them at odds with former CRASH officer Frank Flores, the prosecution’s expert witness.

While no one expects that to happen, no one is making predictions.

The day at the federal court house began on a new note. Rather than the iron chains and prison garb previously worn by the defendant, Sanchez was wearing a casual green shirt and slacks. An artist from Univision was sketching the defendant for the evening news as some 45 supporters and family entered the courtroom. At first they were ordered by armed security to sit at the far side of the chamber where eye contact with the defendant (described as forbidden “communications”) was virtually impossible. As those seats overflowed, however, the large Sanchez family arrived and sat as a bloc closer to the defendant without being impeded.

The point of the new bail hearing was to respond to the order of a Ninth Circuit panel last week admonishing Judge Real to more carefully consider the evidence presented claiming that the 37-year old Sanchez would be a danger to the community and a flight risk if released on bail. Sanchez is a former member of the Mara Salvatrucha gang, who dropped out of active membership to become a founder of Homies Unidos a decade ago. The work of Homies Unidos includes peace-seeking intervention and mediation in the dangerous world of street gangs. Sanchez was targeted by LAPD gang units a decade ago, but won unprecedented political asylum at a federal immigration hearing. The controversy over illegal police tactics, known as the Rampart scandal, resulted in costly reforms of the LAPD supervised by a federal judge until just weeks ago.

For critics, the Sanchez case smells like revenge by elements of the LAPD and the FBI for the Ramparts scandal that tarnished LA law enforcement’s reputation globally. For the prosecution and their lead police witness, officer Frank Flores, it is a case of Alex Sanchez leading a “double life” for ten years, enriching himself on drug deals, and actively participating in MS conspiracies to kill gang rivals.

At stake is the public image of so-called gang prevention and intervention programs, in which former gang members often are employed as peacemakers to lessen violence and channel young people to constructive alternatives. The program is touted as a national model by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and relies in part on the street work carried out by advocates like Sanchez. Up to 125 street-based peacemakers are being hired by the city this year. The LAPD has gradually come to endorse the program for reducing violence and reaching the unreachable, but some officers and city officials are made nervous over the role of former gang members.

The indigent Sanchez is represented by a court-appointed attorney, Kerry Bensinger of Pasadena, who began the morning by responding to the Ninth Circuit’s list of factors to be considered in determining bail. Bensinger agreed that the nature of the offense is serious, but argued that the weight of evidence bearing upon the strength of the government’s case is weak.

The wiretap transcripts from May 2006, for example, a gang member in El Salvador questioning why Sanchez is on the line since he was no longer active in the gang, a piece of evidence which contradicts the claim that Sanchez was a shotcaller and therefore responsible for any and all crimes committed by gang members. This evidence was omitted in the analysis of the wiretaps by Officer Flores and submitted by the prosecution.

Second, the fact that Sanchez was on the phone calls is offered as proof of gang membership by the prosecutors. The defense contends he was on six of many thousand intercepted conversations because, according to an affidavit, he was invited to join the phone calls because they concerned threats to his life and accusations that he was an FBI collaborator.

Third, the defense has submitted evidence that the voice of one “Zombie” on the phone calls is a different individual altogether than the “Zombie” that the prosecutors claim carried out a Sanchez order kill another gang member in El Salvador. No evidence whatever has been introduced that such an order was given by anyone during the calls, which is why Officer Flores claims that lengthy multi-party conversations are carried on in secret code.

Fourth, the judge refused to hear the 20-page testimony of Fr. Gregory Boyle, who heads one of the nations most well-known gang intervention programs, and who attempted to refute Officer Flores point by point.

Fifth, against the government claim that Sanchez has a secret tattoo on his chest, the defense produced an affidavit by a tattoo removal specialist, Rosemarie Ashamalla, that tattoo removal programs like that which treated Sanchez only eliminate tattoos on the face, neck, and hands that can be barriers to re-entry programs.

Sixth, the defense simply dismissed as irrelevent ten-year old photos of Sanchez smiling and throwing a gang sign, and a poem by Sanchez found during a search of a gang members drawer.

Finally, Bensinger pointed to more than one hundred letters attesting to Sanchez’s good work and character, leading the judge to intervene for the first time, saying such letters are merely hearsay, not given under oath. When Bensinger offered to put the authors of the letters on the stand, the judge was silent.

This was a judge who had interrupted Bensinger at least 20 times when the attorney tried to present the same information at the original bail hearing, often caustically, deriding the testimony of Fr. Boyle as “irrelevent.” This was the same judge whose behavior has been described as “problematic” by a Ninth Circuit panel, and as “surreal” by this Nation correspondent.

The judge apparently was stung by criticism appearing in The Nation, since he several times referred to a person “who knows absolutely nothing about the law.” For whatever reason-the Ninth Circuit’s admonishment, The Nation’s criticisms, or his own reflections and consultations–the new Judge Real bore down on the prosecution with key questions.

As in previous sessions, the prosecution made little effort to buffer its arguments, perhaps assuming the judge would simply rubber-stamp their proposed order and send it back to the Ninth Circuit. The prosecution claimed, for example, that other wiretaps from 2000, 2001 and 2008 have been proffered, while ignoring the fact that the proffers have never been accepted and the evidence never submitted. As the prosecution rested its brief case, the judge began his questioning.

Where would the defendant go if he fled the country? the judge asked. El Salvador, replied the prosecutor. But wasn’t he granted political asylum by another court precisely because he would be at great risk of torture or death in El Salvador? That was a decade ago, but we have him on phone calls to El Salvador more recently, was the reply. Were the calls inviting them to El Salvador? (The judge didn’t mention that the parties in El Salvador were in prison or on the run.) No, the calls show that the defendant has “networks” there able to receive him. But wouldn’t the INS hearing have considered this information?

Bensinger reminded the bench that Sanchez’s wife, three children, parents and family all live in Los Angeles, that $2.5 million has been pledged in sureties against his leaving.

But, the prosecutor claimed, Sanchez does not believe he will get a fair trial, and therefore will flee the country before his sentencing. Thats being said by “someone who knows absolutely nothing about the law,” answered the judge. It’s reasonable that the defendant shares that view, your honor. Has the defendant or his lawyer made any such statements, asked the judge? Stepping back, the prosecutor admitted they had not.

Assuming El Salvador is out of the question, the judge resumed, where else would he go? To Latin American countries that have no extradition treaties with the US, came an improvised reply, with no explanation of how Sanchez would escape the tight restrictions that inevitably would come with bail.

A further element requiring scrutiny by the Ninth Circuit panel was Sanchez’s previous criminal record. Bensinger noted that Sanchez had one previous felony conviction, dated 15 years previous, and nothing since. The prosecutor leaped in to cite a May 2009 “encounter” with the LAPD. The judge wanted to know whether there was any result of the encounter, such as an arrest. No, your honor, came the admission, the defendant was questioned by the LAPD officer when he was found talking and drinking on a streetcorner with four other individuals, one of whom was a known MS member.

Seemingly exasperated, the judge then proposed his unusual next procedure. According to this analyst’s extemporaneous notes: “You and Mr. Bensinger should get together, with the head of the gangs program for the City and let us ask him what he knows about Alex Sanchez and this gang. Get the person in charge at the LAPD and ask if there have been any recent gang activities of a public nature involving this defendant. Get them here to perhaps a closed hearing, to talk to them,” about the bail-related questions of being a danger to the community or a flight risk.

With no further discussion, the “hearing” was set for 10am Tuesday, January 13, to be followed by the resumption of the bail hearing which was remanded to Judge Real by the Ninth Circuit. There is no predicting whether this represents an unprecedented approach to conflict resolution, or merely a step by the judge to prove to the critics that he is holding an exhaustive hearing, and armor-plating himself against a future appeal, before denying Sanchez bail once again.

In peace & justice,

We Are Alex
WWW.WEAREALEX.ORG

————————————————————————

Death penalty kills budgets

Gary Crooks
The Spokesman-Review
Perhaps one good outcome of tight budgets will be the death of the death penalty. Fifteen states have rescinded capital punishment since the U.S. Supreme Court revived it in a 1976 ruling, with the latest being New Mexico. The Connecticut Legislature passed a similar bill last year, but the governor vetoed it.

Washington was one of 11 states where legislatures considered abolishing the death penalty last year but didn’t. However, as lawmakers in Olympia get ready to kick people out of vital safety-net programs to close a huge budget gap, they ought to revisit the issue.

The Death Penalty Information Center’s annual report spotlights the sheer waste in spending. Though death sentences declined by 60 percent and executions have also dropped over the past decade, it still takes a lot of money to maintain a capital punishment system.

California, which is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, is spending $137 million a year on the death penalty and hasn’t executed anyone in 3 1/2 years, but it is pondering whether to spend $400 million to build a new death row. Florida spends $24 million per execution. Maryland has executed five people in 20 years at a cost of $186 million.

Before abolishing the death penalty, New Jersey spent $250 million over 25 years and didn’t execute a single person, which prompted West Orange, N.J., Police Chief James Abbott to say, “Give a law enforcement professional like me that $250 million, and I’ll show you how to reduce crime. The death penalty isn’t anywhere on my list.”

For most chiefs, it isn’t a priority. When asked which items are the biggest impediments to efficient law enforcement, most police chiefs mention lack of resources, alcohol and drug abuse, a dearth of programs for the mentally ill, crowded courts, too many guns and gangs, according to the center’s report.

Even Texas, once the hotbed of executions, has chilled the pace ever since its legislature passed a law allowing jurors to consider life in prison without the possibility of parole, which is a far cheaper option.

If the death penalty recently became available, it’s hard to fathom any state jumping at the chance. As is, politics and emotions keep it alive.

Since 1976, there’s been an average of 19,000 murders per year in the United States, yet 41 of 50 states have either executed nobody or averaged less than one per year. Only Texas has averaged more than three executions per year.

Washington state has executed a grand total of four people in that time frame. Idaho has done it once.

It’s time to put this punishment out of its misery.

Rest in pieces. Though the article hasn’t garnered much attention, the New York Times recently reported that the American Law Institute is walking away from the death penalty. That might sound like a snoozer of a story, but the institute, which is made up of 4,000 judges, lawyers and law professors, had been responsible for the intellectual heavy lifting that got the death penalty off the ground and kept it operational after it had been sidelined by the U.S. Supreme Court.

As the Times reported, “A study commissioned by the institute said that decades of experience had proved that the system could not reconcile the twin goals of individualized decisions about who should be executed and systemic fairness. It added that capital punishment was plagued by racial disparities; was enormously expensive even as many defense lawyers were underpaid and some were incompetent; risked executing innocent people; and was undermined by the politics that come with judicial elections.”

That’s the conclusion of longtime supporters. So what does this mean for capital punishment? It’s a dead man walking.

HEROES

I have watched over 8 years how we honor those in uniform. Primarily the military and on occasion police and firemen/women. And in their deaths they are called heroes, and in life they are considered to be patriotic.

But for some reasons those who oppose unjust government actions such as the wars in Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the torture of prisoners are never called heroes or patriots. I have yet to see the statues and pictures to the protesters.

I have yet to see a President during the State of the Union address have several protesters seated there next to the First Lady. And, at any sports events I have never seen these folks honored. Just the other day I went to our local county offices and saw on a long wall of a tunnel some wonderful photos of those in military service. I would have proposed that they put the advocates for piece on the opposite wall to show that these also are good American heroes.

Finally I decided to go to the famous internet to seek definitions for what is a hero, and you can see THAT MANY ARE CHAMPIONS FOR A CAUSE.

Definitions of hero on the Web:
- a man distinguished by exceptional courage and nobility and strength; “RAF pilots were the heroes of the Battle of Britain”
- the principal character in a play or movie or novel or poem
- champion: someone who fights for a cause
- Greek mathematician and inventor who devised a way to determine the area of a triangle and who described various mechanical devices (first century)
- (classical mythology) a being of great strength and courage celebrated for bold exploits; often the offspring of a mortal and a god
- (Greek mythology) priestess of Aphrodite who killed herself when her lover Leander drowned while trying to swim the Hellespont to see her
- bomber: a large sandwich made of a long crusty roll split lengthwise and filled with meats and cheese (and tomato and onion and lettuce and condiments);

different names are used in different sections of the United States 
what must we teach our children and their children … that a hero is can be anyone not just someone in a uniform …that a hero can be a person who stands up for the truth no matter the price one has to pay…

People who risk everything to stop violence and killings are surely heroes…

We need to honor all of our heroes…all of the time.

NCADP CONFERENCE JAN. 14-17

This year the conference for the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty will hold its conference in Louisville Kentucky…this is a great gathering of abolitionist including Sister Helen Prejean, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Exonerated Death Row Inmates, activists and of course me..I will emcee the awards dinner…hope to see you there

MLK JR DAY JAN. 18TH

This is an important day to recognize all that King did but also recognize the work of so many others who made progress in Civil Rights possible.. I hope that you will take this moment to celebrate those who have done so much for all of us.

THE NEW YEAR

It’s time to organize ourselves to do more and do it better in the New Year.

At the same time we must make time in the year ahead to celebrate

My best
leno