Quantcast

Is your Eastside neighborhood covered by a gang injunction? Here’s the map

Go here for a full-size PDF. See map below for Echo Park area gang injunction

L.A. gang injunctions are back in the news this week.  The are more than 40 gang injunctions — some of which cover portions of Atwater Village, Boyle Heights,  Echo Park, Highland Park and other Eastside neighborhoods — that restrict the activities of persons named in the court orders in specific areas.

Many law enforcement officials say the injunctions have been an important tool in fighting gang-related crime. However,  the L.A. Times reports the city is now proposing to make major changes to the injunctions in response to a lawsuit filed last year by the ACLU, which claimed the constitutional rights of individuals are being violated.

Some of the changes would create a process for individuals to avoid being included in an injunction and make it easier for persons to be removed from the constraints of the court orders.

A City Attorney spokesman said the changes are expected to be unveiled by the end of the year.

Capture
The Eastsider’s Daily email digest includes all new content published on The Eastsider during the last 24 hours. Expect the digest to land in your in email in box around 7 p.m. It’s free to sign up!

Once you submit your information, please check your email box to confirm your subscription.




Eastsider Advertising

16 comments

  1. Yo, you gotta problem with it, holmes?

    Do you think the president of the ACLU lives in a gang injunction zone? Personally, I think we should put this matter to vote…if the neighborhood votes to implement strict gang injunction rules, keep em, but if not, lose em.

    • Pretty sure all of the people affected by this would vote to implement strict rules. I wish they would also provide counseling, education, and jobs to these kids and help get them off the street.

  2. Eastsider —
    When this was first proposed four years ago, the discussion in the neighborhood was about Echo Park locos, which I thought were covered by the injunction. But they are not on the map you provided here. Were they never covered?
    Just curious.
    PS: I’m generally opposed to gang injunctions, so this is truly just about about curiousity about the local conversation from four years ago.

  3. My husband just got removed from the injuction he was notified by mail also to join the programs for the members that were affected.

    • Any idea why he was included in the injunction in the first place? On a side note, what’s your husbands personal style (haircut, clothing, etc.)?

  4. Gang Injunctions are an amazing tool to help law enforcement combat gangs and criminal activity! But, there is a definite need to re-evaluate the gang injunction guidelines to who, what, where, when, why and how individuals are identified, processed, monitored etc….Like O’bamaCare – it needs to be improved; but, not REPEALED!

    Mr. District Attorney & City Officials – Gang Injunctions just need to be IMPROVED to ensure everyone is treated fairly and given an opportunity to improve their lives through Education, Mentoring, and Opportunities!

    To ACLU – Bring forth ideas to how to improve ordinances and laws. Communities that live under the threat of gang violence and criminal activities need to be PROTECTED too!!!

  5. I live here in echo park as well and still suffer from vandalism drunken kids/men especially on the weekends. I thought our area had a injunction in place? I live by Mohawk and Reservoir adjacent to an alley and that alley is still a problem to this very day.

  6. These blanket injunctions based on a group but targeting individuals never should have withstood a court challenge, especially for groups so nebulous as a “gang,” with is a police term for them, not the idea the people supposedly in them go by. Its a tribal mentality, and if you are in the tribe’s area, and are Latino, the harder core ones do not give you a choice. So, you say OK, but you don’t really participate, but sometimes you have to stand around with them, talk with them, be stupid with them — for your own protection.

    And the police go through, they see you one day standing around with them, not doing anything wrong, and now you’re on the list of names, no questions asked. And next a court order has your name included. And now you are really under their thumb, except its not just the gang’s thumb, but now the police’s thumb, and they put the screws to you just the same as if you were on probation or parole. Its like that item in the news a few months back, a Latino being deported because a single immigration officer said he was a gang member — and even LAPD Chief Charlie Beck came out with a written letter insisting otherwise, asked that the guy not be deported, but the courts, in their usual wisdom, did not care, the one ICE agent said he was a gang member, so he was out under Trump’s policy to get gang people out. That’s how these gang injunction operate — and the same people who criticize Trump for that are here calling for these injunctions.

    Meanwhile, while technically you can argue there is due process, there isn’t really any due process. You must PROVE you are not in a gang that doesn’t really exist, it is just people in the neighborhood who walk the same streets, go to the same schools, live next to each other. Some of them are bad asses, and others are simply trying to stay alive. You have to prove you didn’t stand around with them that time to be one, something you did so that you didn’t get ripped into two or more pieces. You have to spend a LOT of money on a lawyer to do any of this, and you are up against the entire budget of the City Attorney’s office, backed by that of the entire city government, and you don’t have any money — and you can’t have any proof, all you can have is your say-so. What are they supposed to do, g t a letter from one of the bad-asses saying they are not in the gang?

    These injunctions do not need to show you have even so much as jay-walked, must less participated in any felonies. You don’t have to ever have even been arrested, much less convicted of anything. But you are now treated as if on probation or parole after a conviction, as if you have no rights whatsoever.

    And ONLY Latinos are targeted, you won’t find any white biker gang is being targeted, or any Asian gang.

    In the America I grew up in, people are punished like this only if it is actually shown that THEY, not someone else in the neighborhood, did something. In the America I grew up in, no one is guilty until guilt is proven. In the America I grew up in, probation and prole is only for people convicted of a crime. In the America I grew up in, you are innocent until proven guilty — but that necessity does not exist for these injunctions.

    Some people here have shown some compassion, saying these “kids” should be helped with better education and other. Well, we do have groups doing that, such as El Centro del Pueblo, which aims to get at-risk kids off the street and into positive activities and educate them about a better lifestyle. But this are private operations, the city doesn’t do anything of that, the city only send in the police. And these groups can handle just so many people, their resources are not unlimited.

    • “Its a tribal mentality, and if you are in the tribe’s area, and are Latino, the harder core ones do not give you a choice.”

      So what you are saying is that these gangs more or less force membership because they are so “hard core” but just because you are a member of a “hard core” gang, you shouldn’t be judged as a “hard core” gang member. And in “your” America, membership to a “hard care” gang should OK as long as you don’t break the law?

      I have to say a few things – First off, you don’t sound very hard core. Second, stop making excuses for your decisions to join a gang. There are a lot of honest, hard working latinos in these neighborhoods that ARE NOT members of a gang. Finally, let’s let the neighborhood make the decision – if they sympathize with you and the rest of the innocent gang members and vote not to remove the gang injunction, then let’s remove it…but for some reason, I don’t find that likely.

      On a side note, biker gangs (which aren’t just “white”) don’t force you to join their gang just because you own a motorcycle.

      • You are quite foolish, in any number of ways. First, you presume I’m in a gang — your prejudice shows. So I’ll bet you presume I’m Latino, your racism shows.

        No, no neighborhood ever gets to make such a decision as you propose — that is for the court ONLY under the American system of justice, and of fairness. What you advocate is simply mob rule, not democracy. What you advocate is more dangerous than letting Hitler decide. You show you don’t believe in America, don’t have any understanding whatsoever even of what you advocate.

        You also can’t even understand what I said. I said there is no gang membership, as there is no FORMAL gang as you seem to think there is, there is simply a barrio. And not everyone in the barrio talking with each other are associated as a “gang.” But yes, they must deal with them all the time. And just because they talk, just because someone dresses a certain way, does not mean they are some hardcore “gang” member. Next time you get approached by a bunch of toughs and they demand to know where you are from, and you live there and can’t not run into them, you tell me how much choice you have about whether you must talk with them and show familiarity and that you are on their side, even though all you really are trying to do is walk home and be safe in your neighborhood.

        If the powers that be KNOW these individuals are doing illegal things, they should arrest them and prosecute. You don’t simply take a blanket approach that does not require proof or in any realistic or honest way even provide for due process and apply harsh, parole-like punishment on a broad swatch of people because their name was put on a list of the formal members of a formal group that is not a formal group at all. That is what you do to undermine our Constitution, under which people are innocent until proven guilty. No one has to prove anything to put your name on that list.

        And while parole is considered to be punishment and a matter of holding you in custody, by law these parole-mimicing blanket injunctions are not considered to be that, they are deemed to not be what they really are. While parole must be preceded by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, these parole-mimicing blanket injunctions do not require anything other than that one police officer put your name on a list, and with that, the burden of proof has been shifted to you, not them.

        These blanket injunctions are nothing but a serious corruption of the original intent and idea of an injunction. The entire concept under which these are being imposed is corrupt. Prosecute all these things you claim to “know,” go after those individuals you “know” did something. Do not be corrupting our Constitution and imposing harsh punishment on a broad swatch of people with no proof of anything, no realistic due process, and in a blanket manner.

        • I refuse to be SHAMED into supporting your position out of fear of being a racist or compared to Hitler – that’s just lazy reasoning on your part. This is America, not a 3rd world country. If one does not want to join a gang or is in fear of gang violence, call the police. That’s what our tax dollars are used for. Obviously we can’t vote as a neighborhood but we should. That way, we all get a say and if what you say is true, the majority will side with your position. If what you say is complete rubish, the gang injunction will stand and those that CHOOSE to be associated with a gang will reap the consequences.

          Finally, since you up are such an advocate for the rule of “law” and refuse to understand that idealism isn’t necessarily practicle, do you support the mass deportation of illegal immigrants too?

        • So let me get this straight, your saying the very thing that prays on the non-gang members of the community which will always be latino youths in the teens and early twenties or african americans (BTW are almost singled out as a target regardless of gang affiliation in NELA gang areas), not white, not asian people…..as stated by your own example:

          “Next time you get approached by a bunch of toughs and they demand to know where you are from, and you live there and can’t not run into them, you tell me how much choice you have about whether you must talk with them and show familiarity and that you are on their side, even though all you really are trying to do is walk home and be safe in your neighborhood.”

          You’re saying that sort of illegal intimidation should be allowed to occur because you faulty interpretation of the law? The monitoring of known gang members equates to loss of our constitutionally protected rights under the constitution?

          The California Supreme Court disagreed in 1997.
          The birth of your statements condem the innocent productive members of society by implying these gangs have a power which should be allowed?
          You are talking circles, that “intimidation” which you speak of is directly what this act is intended for.

          You are given so many oppurtunities to avoid gangs. The truth of it is the “snitches get stitches” mind set and ramanticization of gang life is the why kids allow themselves to be indoctrinated. Couple that with parents , brothers, cousins being involved in the life and you have a cycle and proliferation.
          If families get destroyed by the act isn’t it the fault of the very family for allowing these relations to proliferate?
          I find it interesting when tough gangs and their sympathizers claim that they are being treated unfairly, like they have legitimacy to exist in the first place.

    • White gangs aren’t prevalent like Latino gangs, they aren’t tagging every wall, doing drive-bys, stripping every Toyota for spare parts and generally making life from San Diego to Sacramento a frustrating misery for people that respect their neighbors and “life” in general.

      • “White” gangs? I can’t recall ever being approached or even seeing a “white” gang member in southern California (unless you are referring to the prison gangs you see on TV or course).

  7. Gang injunctions are not going to solve the problem of boys joining gangs. We need to focus on the reason gang life is more appealing than leading a “normal” life.

    • THANKS ROBERT! my husband and I were remembering the days when we had boys and girls clubs in every neighborhood in L.A. they kept us busy, kept us in a gym and off the streets. many schools had after school activities also. we don’t have programs like these anymore, free to all kids by the way. so kids are bored and either both parents work or there is only one parent so kids find “friends” in the gang and drug scene.

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments civil and on topic and refrain from personal attacks. The moderator reserves the right to edit or delete any comments. The Eastsider's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy apply to comments submitted by readers. Required fields are marked *

*