City attorney wants to prevent taggers from gathering together

Los Angeles City Atty. Carmen Trutanich wants to give police the ability to arrest "taggers" simply for hanging out together, without having to catch them in the act -- raising thorny constitutional issues as he lays the groundwork for a campaign to tackle the city's vexing graffiti problem.

In an interview, Trutanich said his staff has begun amassing street-level intelligence and reviewing legal strategies that would pave the way for a series of injunctions targeting graffiti and "tagging" crews. The measures would be lawsuits of sorts, brought on behalf of the public, treating much of the graffiti that mars buildings and overpasses as a criminal enterprise and arguing that it has become such a nuisance that it requires an extraordinary police response.

Los Angeles is the national leader in the use of civil injunctions to combat criminal gang behavior -- the model for Trutanich's proposal. The city has 43 injunctions targeting 71 gangs, including one rolled out earlier this year over a 13.7-square-mile area of South L.A., the largest in California. The tagging injunctions would focus on neighborhoods where graffiti is a particularly acute problem, such as the Harbor Gateway area, the San Fernando Valley and, especially, South L.A.

Read the full story on tagging here.

--Scott Gold in, South Los Angeles

Photo: Michael Robinson Chavez / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Francisco V.]

Go Carmen! This is what we need to clean up our neighborhoods from the horrible scars of tagging. That ACLU lawyer has no clue what its like to live surrounded by tagging. He probably lives in a suburban area where people would freak if they ever saw graffiti - but he wants the rest of us to live with it. Carmen, don't let these whiney lawyers stop you from cleaning up our neighborhoods!

[Dr Zivago]

To All Los Angeles Taxpayers... OPEN YOUR WALLETS!!
I smell Multi Million dollar lawsuits in the making. This is "Profiling". The same thing the police are prohibited from doing under FEDERAL laws.
Once one of these arrests gets publicized, the ACLU, Bender & Bender, and all the other Bottom Feeders will spring into action. You'll see their advertisments during station breaks on the Jerry Springer show. "Have you or someone you know been unlawfully arrested under the Trutanich Tagging Law? We'll get you the Millions you are intitled to...(ad naseum)" call 1-800-SLIMEBALL for your free consultation.

[shirley]

Trutanich talks like he's the star of some gunslinging Wild West spaghetti western he's writing for himself to star in: "I'm going to create an end of the earth scenario for these guys," he growls in that voice he's honed as a criminal lawyer defending these criminals (ONLY if they had lots of money) in Long Beach. But comes off like a pit boss who needs a lesson in the constitution and working with law enforcement like LAPD.

The cop you interview who notes this could set back LAPD's recent years of progress under Chief Bratton in working to gain the trust of every community, by equating two kids standing in the street just talking in baggy clothes with those who are actual taggers or have violated parole or gang injunctions, is the sort of voice vital to the discussion that clearly hasn't been considered before this inexperienced guy launched into another soundbite- driven venture to appease the likes of the first commenter. With his blaming "whiney lawyers" and yelling "Go Carmen!" - typical of Trutanich supporters.

Trutanich has created a make-work bonanza for civil rights lawyers. Like it or not, that pesky thing called the constitution must be considered when proposing radical new laws like this.

While I support the established view (shared by Chief Bratton I believe) that tagging is in fact often a first step toward more serious crime and not some benign artistic expression, there IS a distinction between a thirteen-year-old kid standing in the street talking to a neighbor who may have been identified as being in a gang -- and maybe he or she doesn't even know it -- and someone who IS actually a tagger, gangmember or has violated parole or something else that is legally actionable. Our City officials HAD ALREADY announced a new ordinance to hold parents of taggers liable for damage (echoed by County officials), and had announced last year that the city would be empowered to seize cars and homes and possessions of such gangmembers. That includes the authority to have them evicted from rentals, putting pressure on the whole family to keep the gangbanger in line. BUT Trutanich once again is more focused on something that appeals to the rightwing base and yahoos like Francisco V here, without regard to legality or the constitution or what it would cost us in lawsuits AND in human terms by turning that thirteen year-old kid talking to a neighbor into a kid with a record.

THAT is what the street cop you quote does NOT want, and what Trutanich allegedly would focus on as part of his empty promises during the election. You mention a "contentious" election during which you say civil rights leaders hoped Trutanich would be the candidate who balanced prosecution with gang prevention programs? Maybe they bought your OpEd endorsement lingo that he was the candidate to do just that without "the talk-tough bromides." Picking someone BECAUSE he has no experience on the "right" side of the law for the past 25 years and is clueless about the realities of what LAPD faces was an utterly naive move.

LAST thing we need as Chief Bratton is leaving and LAPD must continue the progress he made in earning the trust of every community while reducing violent crime, as the cops distinguish between real gangbangers and those who are still saveable.

[shirley]

PS- Forgot to add ANOTHER bad timing factor and obvious left hand doesn't know what the right is doing, factor we don't need: This comes as the state is planning to release thousands of least violent prisoners because it's been ordered to reduce overcrowding. So they'll be replaced by these kids, who may then end up in jail and BECOME trained by gangbangers to become criminals? Even the conservatives who talk tough on crime see the absurdity of this.

[Mickey Malone]

Go Carmen. I am so tired of trying to keep the kids off a wall across from my house. The police have been wonderful but arrest, and making the kids and parents pay, either by painting out graffitti or paying money to the City would stop a lot more.

[fred]

I have the city out regularly to my place to remove graffiti, I cant imagine the cost city-wide....

[RICK]

IF THEY REALLY WANT TO COMBAT GRAFFFIII USE HIGH TECH SURVELINCES LIKE THE ARMY AND YOU STICK THE BILL COST TO THE PARENTS OF THESE TAGGERS SO HIGH THAT THEYWOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. SORRY THE LAW DOSE NOT ALLOW THE PARENTS TO DISCPLINE THEIR KIDS LIKE I WAS, WITH A BELT. I AM GLAD MY PARENT CARED ABOUT ME TO DO THAT IT TAUGHT ME RIGHT FROM WRONG.

[D]

excellent idea. send all these idiots a message and clean the city up!

[Great]

Go Tru! To heck with the ACLU and their constant coddling of low-lifes and criminals. It doesn't matter where they fall on the tagger hierarchy (bad ones versus "better" ones), they need to STOP doing it or there will be consequences!

If this idea doesn't work, maybe we can simply get the tagger's addresses and go cover THEIR houses with nonsense...

[Lisbeth]

Gang bangers, taggers, and graffiti writers would be lump as one, criminalized by their appearance. The law proposed is a violation of the first amendment to the constitution (prohibiting the free exercise of religion, infringing the freedom of speech, infringing the freedom of the press, limiting the right to peaceably assemble) and adds to the racial profiling used by law enforcement. The City of LA needs to revamp youth programs, community events, promote muralism, not add millions of dollars to Graffiti abatement programs and send the youth/community members into the prison system.

[cooper]

These are not artists. They are dogs marking their territories. So treat them like dogs. round them up and put them in jail. Maybe their parents will pay mucho bucks to "adopt" them.

[aaala]

"a way to intimidate the neighborhood and advance the criminal activities of the gang."

"That is just not true for taggers," he said. "So there is no basis to enjoin association."

The above statement is catagorically false.

See:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/12/BA7Q14N5S6.DTL

"The guys who didn't like it are members of a graffiti group.

Anonymous thugs threw rocks at his window at night, and he was followed to work by a group of guys in hooded sweatshirts.

"This was guys walking up behind you, staring at you.""

[aaron howell]

Skateboarding is not a crime!

[Kelvin]

Best news of the day! I am sick of seeing city-scapes destroyed by these criminals. The nonsense that the ACLU is talking about shows that they have no idea at all of the way decent people feel about graffiti. The ACLU can bring all the law suits they want, but they have one problem - it's a jury of Los Angelenos that gets to decide and you will not find a jury in Los Angeles who cares about the rights of graffiti gang members. This is what I voted for, and I'm glad that Trutanich is living up to his promise to us.

[Shevalsheshe]

I'm 59 years old and I do not remember seeing this defacing of property years ago. Why is this all over the country now? It makes property look very ugly. Most people do not like signs in our landscape that are neatly printed and hung in our neighborhoods. We definitely do not like hand-painted signs with messages and characters that we do not understand. This country is changing fast - and not for the good!

[FarmerTom]

Combating one illegal behavior with another illegal behavior is not merely wrong, but stupid. The first time anyone arrested under this proposed law comes before a judge, I expect the judge to free the arrested and reprimand the DA and nullify the law. It's dead in the water. Back to the drawing board, Carmen. And I don't mean that I'm sympathetic to taggers, nor unsympathetic to those who are fed up. But running roughshod over the Constitution-- the basis of most of all our freedoms-- is no way to solve the problem.