Home Blog Page 46

Public Defender No. 1: Jeff Adachi’s Revolution

0

SF Weekly

Judge Philip J. Moscone is losing his temper. “I’m not a jury, and I’m not an artichoke,” he snaps at the squabbling prosecutor and defense attorney in his courtroom.

It’s the second day of questioning in the preliminary hearing of Lisa Heng, a 31-year-old Cambodian-American woman who is being charged with first degree murder for the death of Matt Sheahan. The hearing, to determine whether the state has probable cause to take the case to trial, was supposed to last just one day. But Heng’s case landed on the desk of Jeff Adachi, the elected public defender for San Francisco, and Adachi — dressed in a well-tailored suit and yellow Armani tie, his signature suspenders peeking out from his suit coat — is nothing if not thorough in his cross-examination. He stands at a lectern as he questions his witnesses, slightly hunched over a three-ring binder, marking off his questions as he asks them with a light flourish of his pen. Where the prosecutor, Tiffaney Gipson, introduces 8½-by-11-inch photographs as exhibits, Adachi produces giant poster-board sized enlargements of his pictures. During recesses, Adachi sits with the defendant’s family members and answers their questions, but he also makes a point of introducing himself and offering his condolences to the victim’s mother.

On the opening day of the hearing, Adachi had set the tone by dismantling the testimony of the prosecution’s first witness, a young police officer. Celina Chow, who was still in training when she responded to a call at a Tenderloin SRO in the early morning hours of July 18, 2014, answered Adachi’s question about whether Heng was “sobbing hysterically” that morning with an emphatic “no.” Adachi then read aloud from Chow’s police report, in which she had written that Heng was “sobbing hysterically.”

“Which is more accurate? Your testimony now that she wasn’t sobbing hysterically, or your police report?” Adachi demanded. “Do you understand the difference it makes when you use an adjective?”

It was the kind of gotcha moment designed for courtroom dramas, and Adachi pulled it off with style. But there’s a certain hollowness to the exercise of showing up the rookie cop. The orange sweatsuit-clad defendant sitting next to Adachi won’t be acquitted over Chow’s iffy memory of a stray adjective.

Another contentious moment came when Adachi goaded the medical examiner over her lack of experience with stab wounds that have not resulted in death, forcing the doctor to defend her life’s work: “I do autopsies for a living. They don’t come to me unless they’re deceased.” She looked a little silly, but then, Judge Moscone is no artichoke.

The first day of cross-examination had been just a preview of the “fireworks” Adachi promised me were in store for Day Two, when Sgt. Alan Levy, the officer who interrogated Heng following the stabbing, is called to the stand. Levy is a handsome young homicide detective who wears a perpetual smirk. When Adachi struggles to play a video on the giant AV system, Levy leaves the witness stand to try to fix the television himself. He’s that kind of guy.

Adachi questions Levy twice, first in a voir dire challenging whether Heng’s statement to the police is permissible, and then again in cross-examination. The defender presses the sergeant on his interrogation tactics, forcing the police officer to acknowledge that he asked Heng 65 questions before advising her of her Miranda rights. Adachi tries to get Levy to discuss what kinds of interrogation techniques he might have used or been trained on (a line of questioning the judge mostly forecloses), focusing on whether Levy used the “Reid Technique,” a controversial interrogation method that has been linked to false confessions.

Later, Adachi homes in on Levy’s decision not to treat Heng as a victim of domestic violence, even though she claimed to have been punched twice by Sheahan that night. Adachi’s questions have a clear message — that Heng was the victim and not the abuser in the relationship, Sheahan’s death notwithstanding — and they prompt the judge to again chastise the defender’s dramatics. “I assume you’re not looking for a second profession working for the media,” Moscone grumbles.

Adachi is unfazed. This is how he operates, not just as Heng’s public defender but as San Francisco’s Public Defender. He defends his clients vigorously, but he does not simply try individual cases: Jeff Adachi is waging a much larger campaign against what he refers to as the “injustice system.”

“The structural critique that I have of the system is that it’s not fair,” Adachi says later in his office. “You’re not going to be treated fairly, particularly if you’re poor and a person of color.”

As the only elected public defender in California, Adachi uses his office to seek to redress injustice systemically. Last December, Adachi resigned from his longtime position on the board of directors of the California Public Defenders Association and founded a new group, Public Defenders for Social Change. Inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement and the ongoing national conversation about racism in law enforcement and the courts, Adachi decided it was time for public defenders to step forward, testify to the systemic racism and bias they witness on a daily basis, and lead a movement for change.

It’s an auspicious moment for Adachi to press his charges in San Francisco. The problem of racial disparities in policing and prosecutions is on the minds of local and national media and political leaders and is shaping up to be a key issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Meanwhile, San Francisco’s law enforcement agencies are reeling from a series of scandals, including problems at the San Francisco Police Department DNA testing lab, allegations of inmates in the county jail being forced by sheriff’s deputies to fight, and the release of racist, sexist, and homophobic text messages exchanged between active SFPD officers.

Both the text message and jail fight scandals were catalyzed by press conferences called by Adachi, one directly and one indirectly. His willingness to take issues public has led some of his critics, like former San Francisco Police Officers Association President Gary Delagnes, to call him a “media whore.” But Adachi doesn’t seem to mind.

“It’s like Bobby Seale said, ‘Seize the time,'” Adachi says, quoting the co-founder of the Black Panther Party. “This is the time when race and criminal justice reform are at the forefront, and I intend to work with others to make that happen. I want to empower line public defenders to be able to not only be zealous advocates in the courtroom, but be zealous and effective advocates on the street.”

On the evening of June 3, 1973, Yip Yee Tak left a bakery in San Francisco Chinatown, stepped into the street, and was shot in the head. The murder of the Chinatown gang leader was quickly pinned on Chol Soo Lee, a 21-year-old Korean immigrant who was tried, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison. Lee was innocent, however, and the campaign to free him served as a turning point in the life of Jeff Adachi.

Adachi had grown up the son of an auto mechanic dad and lab technician mom in Sacramento, working what he calls “the grossest jobs” in the world. He plucked 40 to 50 ducks an hour for hunters (he still doesn’t have fingerprints on some of his fingers as a result) and cleaned coagulated blood out of test tubes. He wasn’t a good student, and his guidance counselor urged him to follow in his dad’s footsteps and become a mechanic.

Adachi’s parents were raised in poverty, and he calls his upbringing “lower middle class.” His maternal great-grandparents had eloped from Japan to Hawaii in the late 1800s. They moved to San Francisco the following decade, then after the 1906 earthquake to French Camp, where they became onion farmers. His father’s family lived in Walnut Grove, a segregated community where whites lived on one side of the river and Japanese and Chinese people on the other.

Adachi was in third grade when he learned that his parents and grandparents had been interned during World War II. He recalls getting into a fight with another kid at school who taunted him: “He said, ‘Your parents were in the camp or in jail,’ and I said, ‘No they weren’t,’ and we got in a fight.” Adachi was suspended from school. His mother later explained that they had committed no crime, but were interned because they were Japanese-Americans. It was an early lesson in injustice that Adachi says has influenced him throughout his life.

The prospect of a life working as a mechanic motivated Adachi to get serious about his studies, and he attended community college in Sacramento before transferring to the University of California at Berkeley in 1978. At first, Adachi says, he “just wanted to make money,” and he planned to attend business school at Cal.

The Berkeley campus Adachi arrived on was a far cry from the school’s activist heyday of the late 1960s, but he and a group of four friends from Sacramento found their way to radical politics after learning about the case of Chol Soo Lee. Reporting on the case revealed that Lee’s conviction was due to faulty eyewitness testimony and police and prosecutorial misconduct. Lee later killed a man in prison (in self-defense, he claimed) and was sent to death row.

The case galvanized the Asian-American community, and Adachi and his friends got involved. They had much to learn about effective activism. (One of the first rallies they organized took place outside the federal court, though Lee had been convicted in state court.) Adachi and his friends also began studying the works of radical thinkers including Malcolm X, Dick Gregory, as well as Huey Newton, Seale, and other Black Panthers. Adachi switched his major to Asian American Studies.

“I think what drew me to this fight for justice … a lot of it was identity,” Adachi says. “You’re trying to figure out who you are and how you fit in. Learning about your history was big — learning Asian American history. By that time I knew about the [internment] camps and all that, but I didn’t really know about black history, Latino history, Native American culture and history. When you start learning about that, a few things happen. You broaden your understanding, and then you get pissed.”

The Chol Soo Lee Defense Committee and a new team of lawyers fought for years to secure a new trial, and Lee was ultimately acquitted and freed from prison. Another of Adachi’s contributions to the fight was playing bass with a band that released a single in 1978 to raise money for the defense team. “The Ballad of Chol Soo Lee” tells the tale of much of Adachi’s life work in the courts:

The courts convicted Chol Soo on a hot Sacramento day

By a frosty white judge and a stone-cold D.A.

He’s been in jail since ’73 a soul on ice

Can you call it blind justice? You better start thinking twice.

Chol Soo Lee died this past December at 62. Adachi delivered his eulogy.

“You’re a potted plant. You’re a public defender. Your job is to go into the holding cell and get that man to plead guilty.”

Those are the words Jeff Adachi recalls being told by a judge in one of the first felony cases he tried as a young attorney in the Public Defender’s Office. When Adachi went ahead with the trial anyway — his client was facing a 16-year sentence for auto burglary and didn’t want to plead guilty — the judge called the attorney up to the bench and warned him, “I’m going to enjoy sentencing your client to every year of the 16 years.”

Adachi is inured to the “potted plant” expectations many judges, prosecutors, defendants, and the general public have of public defenders. He’s a keen observer of the media — he even directed a film, The Slanted Screen, about how Asian-American men are portrayed in popular culture. “Public defenders are routinely lampooned on television, rap music, popular culture, and movies, and so one of the challenges in being a public defender is disproving that and proving yourself,” he says.

Adachi relishes a challenge. In that early felony case, he didn’t bother trying to persuade his client to plead guilty. He sat in the holding cell with the defendant and prepared for trial. “It actually worked for me,” Adachi says, “because I was so incensed that I worked the heck out of that case and we got an acquittal.”

Defying the assembly-line nature of the courts system is both Adachi’s mission and signature. “How do you try a case where your client was identified by four eyewitnesses, they have a video tape confession showing your client demonstrating how something was done, and [they have] physical evidence? Most lawyers couldn’t even imagine getting up in front of a jury and trying those cases, and we try those cases all the time,” he says.

Indeed, Adachi’s penchant for taking cases to court became a key issue in his first campaign for public defender in 2002. In the weeks leading up to the election, Adachi found himself having to defend himself to the San Francisco Chronicle as not “some kind of Russian roulette trial lawyer” while his opponent, Kimiko Burton, boasted that under her leadership, the office was “much more circumspect about the cases going to trial.”

Adachi had started working for the public defender in 1986 as a misdemeanor attorney, struggling to provide effective representation to the 280 clients he’d be assigned at a time. He tried 28 jury trials in his first 18 months and, eventually, learned how to win. He moved up to felonies after a few years, and was tapped by Jeff Brown, then the head of the office, for the role of chief attorney (a position responsible for the management of the office’s attorneys) in 1998. It was generally assumed that he would succeed Brown in the top job.

But when Brown left office in 2001 — before the end of his term — to take a seat on the California Public Utilities Commission, then-Mayor Willie Brown appointed Kimiko Burton, the daughter of California Democratic Party powerhouse John Burton (he was president of the state Senate at the time), to fill the job until the election. Burton fired Adachi on her first day. (Brown, explaining his seemingly nepotistic choice to the Los Angeles Times in 2002, invoked, well, nepotism: “I don’t know Jeff Adachi from Adam. I have known Kimiko Burton since her birth. Why, in the name of heaven, if I have an opportunity to name someone, would I name someone I don’t know?”)

Adachi entered private practice and began his campaign against the so-called “Willie Brown-John Burton machine.” John Burton kicked his political operation into high gear for his daughter’s campaign, bringing in money and endorsements from Sacramento and Washington D.C. In just one example of the heavy-handed nature of the Burton machine, the late Ted Gullicksen of the San Francisco Tenants Union told the San Francisco Bay Guardian that he had been warned an endorsement for Adachi would mean less support for tenant’s rights from John Burton in Sacramento. But despite Kimiko Burton raising four times as much campaign money as Adachi, the challenger won by a significant margin.

When Adachi took leadership of the Public Defender’s Office, the budget was just $13 million a year, and the entire staff of attorneys shared one paralegal. Under his leadership the budget has more than doubled — to almost $30 million a year — and Adachi boasts that he offers San Francisco’s poor “the best representation money can’t buy.” In addition to a staff of paralegals, the office also now employs investigators and social workers. The social workers ensure clients get enrolled in drug treatment programs and don’t violate their probation.

A special team focuses exclusively on helping people clear past convictions from their records, a process allowed for by state law that was nevertheless rarely taken advantage of until Adachi started the Clean Slate Program in 1998. The office is able to expunge records for about 2,000 people a year, making it easier for them to find employment and housing.

It’s all part of what Adachi calls “holistic representation.” As an office charged with a constitutional mandate to represent the poor in what Adachi calls “a society that’s addicted to charging people with crimes and incarcerating them,” he has a vested interest in the “social outcome” of his clients. “The worst thing in the world if you’re a public defender,” he says, ” is to see your client back in jail again.”

Adachi’s expansive view of what it means to be the elected public defender has touched off two major shakeups in San Francisco politics. The first was a somewhat hubristic campaign for pension reform that began in 2010. Following a study by San Francisco’s civil grand jury on the steep costs of the city’s public employee pension fund, Adachi threw himself into a campaign for pension reform, touching off a two-year battle between himself and the city’s labor unions. At the time, the city’s budget and employees were struggling under the effects of the Great Recession. Adachi wanted public employees to contribute more to their pension and health insurance costs, both to free up money for other city services and to ensure the long-term health of the underfunded benefits programs.

“We had police officers who were retiring with a $250,000 a year pension, at the same time they were closing summer school for kids because they didn’t have enough money in supplemental funds in the city budget to help,” Adachi says. “I just saw a glaring contradiction in terms of what we were trying to do as public servants and the need to feed the pension and healthcare costs.”

The unions saw the crusade as an all-out assault on workers who were already struggling with layoffs and contract givebacks thanks to the poor economy. Adachi was compared to Scott Walker, Wisconsin’s union-busting governor, and worse. (Crossing a picket line at a nonunion hotel to fundraise for the campaign made matters even worse.) Gary Delagnes of the Police Officers Association called him a “fat-cat front man,” writing: “Jeff Adachi is a hypocrite. He has a mansion in St. Francis Woods, owns a luxury Mercedes, salary of $196,000, funded buy [sic] a billionaire venture capitalist. Oh, and by the way, has never paid a dime into his own pension!” Five years later, many union members and staff still react with revulsion and anger to his name.

Adachi’s work on pension reform was necessarily distinct from his job as public defender, and it alienated some of his own employees, who spoke publicly and in private against the campaign. He campaigned on his own time to place a reform measure, Proposition B, on the ballot in 2010 (it lost) and again in 2011. He jumped into the mayoral campaign in August 2011 at the last minute, in an attempt to keep the spotlight on the pension issue, leading some critics to speculate that the entire pension issue was a stalking horse to raise his political profile for the run. (“The pieces now fall into place,” then-Supervisor Sean Elsbernd said at the time to SF Weekly. “In the end, what Jeff is really all about is Jeff.”)

Adachi’s 2011 pension Proposition D did not pass, nor did he win the mayoral race, but his campaign inspired labor and the “city family” to negotiate a compromise measure, Proposition C, which did pass. Adachi takes credit for getting the city to the point where Prop. C was passable. “In my view, it only sort of patched the problem,” he says, “but at least it was a step in the right direction. At least it’s going to help sustain the pension fund during hard times.” And he sees what he did as in line with what public defenders do: taking care of problems others in government cannot or will not address. “Nobody dealt with it,” he says. “I would see this as entirely consistent with public defenders taking on unpopular issues.”

The other convulsion Adachi touched off in San Francisco politics began on March 2, 2011, and continues to reverberate today. That day, he called a press conference and screened for the media surveillance camera footage his office had acquired from the Henry Hotel in SOMA. He also posted the videos on YouTube.

The videos showed San Francisco narcotics police entering rooms in the residential hotel with a master key and removing items during two December 2010 drug busts. The events portrayed in the video contradicted the officers’ police reports and constituted illegal searches, Adachi alleged at the time. Subsequent videos released by Adachi and private attorneys showed more illegal searches and thefts by police officers at various residential hotels around the city.

Then-police Chief Jeff Godown criticized Adachi’s tactic of going straight to the media. “We are under attack every day by the public defender’s office,” he complained to the Chronicle at the time “There isn’t anything I’ve seen based on the videotape or the police report that leads me to believe that we have any issues.”

But the issues were real, and the searches at the Henry Hotel soon ballooned into one of the largest scandals in SFPD history. District Attorney George Gascon quickly threw out the cases involved in the searches, but Adachi pressed for more. He wanted a review of all the criminal cases the officers had been involved in and for the investigation to be conducted independently of the DA’s office, since Gascon had been police chief at the time of the busts. The FBI soon took over and, in 2014, six officers were indicted on charges that included criminal conspiracies to deal drugs and steal from suspects, conspiring to threaten and intimidate residents in order to conduct illegal searches of SRO hotels, and falsifying police reports. Two of those officers were convicted of several federal corruption charges last December. Another pleaded guilty and testified against his former co-workers.

The scandal flared up again in March of this year when one of the officers, Sgt. Ian Furminger, applied for bail while he appeals his 41-month prison sentence. In response, federal prosecutors filed a motion that included transcripts from racist, sexist, and homophobic texts Furminger had exchanged with other police officers.

The racist text messages drew national attention in a country now on heightened alert for concrete evidence of racism in policing. Adachi again called for a thorough review of all the cases the involved police officers had been part of — this time, he got his wish. Gascon has now enlisted three retired judges to join a task force to investigate biased policing and review more than 3,000 cases for signs of racial bias affecting arrest decisions or leading to wrongful convictions.

“I think we did more with releasing the Henry Hotel video tapes than other reforms that were put in place through the Police Commission, because we exposed what was happening. And I think it’s going to have a positive effect,” Adachi says. “It’s already had a positive effect.”

It’s ironic, but not surprising, that the racist language used by corrupt San Francisco police officers in text messages has prompted a more significant response from the city’s law enforcement establishment than has decades of ongoing and unhidden evidence of systemic racial bias in the treatment of African-Americans. The establishment is more offended by the use of a racial slur than it is by the steady stream of black defendants who move daily through the courtrooms of the Hall of Justice, largely unseen and unthought-of, accused of crimes the city’s white population gets away with regularly.

“I remember when I first started as a public defender,” Adachi says in his office on a Saturday morning in May. “I was watching court and I saw these two people being sentenced. One was this middle-aged white man, and he had his family in the front row. Beautiful family — he had this little blond, blue-eyed daughter sitting in the front row, and the judge, who was white, looked over at his family and nodded in approval. He had an eloquent lawyer. He had embezzled $800,000 from the University of California — embezzled over two or three years — but the judge looked at him very compassionately and gave him probation.

“Next case up was an African-American young man, 19 years old, for selling $20 worth of rock cocaine. I don’t remember who spoke for him, but it probably wasn’t much. There was no family in the courtroom. He got three years in prison: Boom! I just watched that, and I was like, ‘Wow.’ And nobody blinked.”

Adachi was in the office for a meeting of Public Defenders for Social Change, the organization he founded to shake up the system and force judges and prosecutors to blink. Line attorneys from all six Bay Area counties (San Francisco, Alameda, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Marin, and Solano) have joined the fledgling group, which meets monthly. One of the group’s projects has been to develop a motion on implicit racial bias to present to judges during bail hearings. Judges might assign higher bail to African-American defendants unconsciously, Adachi says, so the motion is a way to prompt judges to be mindful of their internal biases.

On this Saturday, about two dozen public defenders gathered to discuss strategies for exposing police and prosecutorial misconduct and to plan a conference the group will host later this month at the UC Berkeley School of Law. The conference will train public defenders and other defense attorneys on how to raise the issues of racism and implicit bias in the courtroom in ways that will benefit their clients. If public defenders start acting in concert to challenge bias in the system, Adachi says, “I think we’ll be able to start a mini-public defender revolution in the courts.”

Considering Adachi’s radical roots and revolutionary rhetoric, his focus on implicit, as opposed to intentional, racial bias can seem incongruous. But Adachi appears to be going all in on the theory that all individuals carry prejudice and that disparate outcomes in the system are the result of unconscious bias instead of racist malice. His choice is, in a way, quintessentially Adachi. This, after all, is a man who has spent his life defending people, no matter what crime they’ve been accused of. He is probably the only political figure in San Francisco willing to say a kind word about Enrique Pearce, the political consultant recently charged with possessing child pornography, who, Adachi reminds me, should not be presumed guilty.

Adachi’s approach to confronting racism in the system gives everyone involved the benefit of the doubt. “We all have this residue in our minds that causes us, particularly when we’re under stress or we don’t have a lot of time to make decisions, to default to stereotypes,” he says, implicating himself as well. So he doesn’t accuse his targets of being racists; he offers them the opportunity to address unintentional wrongs. Even against his most pitched opponents in a lifelong battle against injustice, Jeff Adachi is willing to offer up a defense.

http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/jeff-adachi-public-defender-black-lives-matter-racism-criminal-justice-sfpd/Content?oid=3698709

 

Behind Courtroom Doors

0

Read Felony Unit Manager Manohar Raju’s article on Medium.

Behind Courtroom Doors

Adachi: The Over-Policing of Black Women in SF

0


While citizens demand answers for the police killings of unarmed men of color nationally, an everyday injustice continues unabated in San Francisco: the profiling of African American women.

It’s an insidious problem that’s garnered little attention in the newly invigorated civil rights movement. And it’s only getting worse. According a recent study by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, black women, who make up only 6 percent of The City’s female population, account for nearly half the female arrests. To be a black woman in San Francisco means having an arrest rate 13 times higher than women of other races.

The new report also shows African American female motorists get pulled over for traffic offenses 17 times more often than white women. On March 31, Meseka Henry was one of them. The San Francisco native and Muni driver was double parked in front of her apartment while dropping off her children. A patrol car flashed its lights, and Henry moved along. She and the officers ended up parallel at a light. One of the officers appeared irritated, and motioned for her to roll down her window. She answered with similar exasperation.

“Why are you bothering me? Don’t you have some real police work to do?” she asked. It was dinnertime in the heart of the bustling Mission and she was looking for a place to park.

Officers pulled Henry over and asked for her license and registration. She asked why she was stopped. As the officer explained she had been blocking traffic earlier, she dug into her purse for her documents. But first, she pulled out a cell phone and told him she wanted to film the encounter. Then everything went south.

The officer’s partner rushed to her window and slapped the phone from her hand. He yanked her out by her hair, pulling off her weave and ripping out clumps of her hair beneath it. He slammed her to the ground and knelt on her temple. The pain was excruciating. She cried and begged to be handcuffed to make it stop. Officers searched her car, but found nothing illegal. The encounter ended with paramedics called and Henry facing a resisting arrest charge.

Too often, the public’s first reaction is to speculate on how the victim must have provoked her own brutalization. Did she comply quickly enough? Did she talk back? Use a sharp tone? Those who rationalize the use of excessive force may think they’re supporting police. On the contrary, such comments demonstrate a belief that highly trained officers are unable to control their emotions or act in a professional, measured matter. If a black eye seems a reasonable consequence for a law-abiding mother who dared to complain about a traffic stop, what does that say about the level of violence we are willing to accept from officers in more stressful situations?

Some may argue that African American women are detained and arrested more often because they commit more crimes. But this assertion doesn’t hold water when you examine drug arrests, which exhibit the most glaring racial disparity. Of the women arrested on narcotics charges in San Francisco, 68 percent are black. Yet we know drugs don’t discriminate, because whites comprise 60 percent of San Francisco’s fatal drug overdoses. In addition, study after study has shown similar rates of drug use and sales among all racial groups. Not convinced by academic research? Simply drive through the Tenderloin and witness the broad diversity of drug dealers and addicts.

Police Chief Greg Suhr, while rightly acknowledging the racial discrimination that marred police enforcement in the past, is wrong when he states socioeconomic issues alone are responsible for today’s disproportionate number of African Americans behind bars. And socioeconomic issues do not explain why, according to the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, San Francisco’s arrest rate of black women is four times higher than anywhere else in California.Poverty alone cannot reconcile the fact that black teenage girls in San Francisco have arrest rates 50 times higher than their counterparts in other counties.

To reduce racial disparities, San Francisco needs more than an honest conversation about race. It needs both transparency and accountability. Police must keep ongoing and detailed statistics on the demographics of those who are pulled over, detained, searched, arrested or let off with a warning. While SFPD currently records some information on traffic stops, it is almost never analyzed or made available for public scrutiny. When it’s difficult to even gauge the severity of the problem, how can we begin to abate it?

Jeff Adachi is the elected public defender of San Francisco. His public affairs program, Justice Matters, can be seen on SFGOV-TV or at sfjusticematters.com.

Francisco Ugarte to be Honored by Latina Group

0

San Francisco, CA — San Francisco Public Defender Immigration Attorney Francisco Ugarte will be honored at a May 14 ceremony for his work empowering women facing deportation.

Ugarte will receive the award from the San Francisco immigrant rights organization Mujeres Unidas y Activas (MUA), which nurtures leadership skills among immigrant Latinas, many of whom have experienced domestic violence. MUA will present the award during its 25th Anniversary celebration at Saint Mary’s Cathedral, from 5-10 p.m. For tickets, go to http://mua25.eventbrite.com

MUA Co-Director Juana Flores said her organization has been fortunate to work closely with Ugarte, who has referred public defender clients to MUA “so that they might recognize their own power, become leaders of their lives, families and communities, and educate their communities about their rights.”

“Mujeres Unidas y Activas appreciates Francisco Ugarte for the humanity that lives in his heart and his extraordinary professionalism,” Flores said.

Ugarte has worked on behalf of domestic violence victims who were detained by ICE after calling police for help, Flores said.

“When the abuse of immigration authorities and anti-immigrant laws put these women in situations of deportation and separated them from their children, Francisco fought so that they would be free and searched for remedies to their immigration status.  Francisco’s legal career has always focused on our most vulnerable members of our communities. We are thrilled to recognize all of the work that he has done for our community and the spirit that he brings to representing those with the least privileges among us at our 25th anniversary.”

Ugarte was hired by the San Francisco Public Defender in 2014 as the office’s first full-time immigration attorney to help clients handle the immigration implications of their criminal cases. Since 1996, federal legislation has expanded the range of criminal offenses that trigger deportation and mandatory detention, even for legal immigrants.

San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi said Ugarte’s work is invaluable to immigrant families.

“Even a minor brush with the law can separate families through deportation. Francisco’s guidance on our cases means our clients are less likely to experience these devastating consequences,” Adachi said.

Also to be honored are MUA’s Maria Carrillo, the Women’s Employment Rights Clinic, and domestic worker and immigrant rights movement leader Maria Reyes. Ai-Jen Poo, director of the National Domestic Workers Alliance and co-director of the Caring Across Generations campaign, will be the keynote speaker

###

Man Blinded in Brawl Acquitted of Assault

San Francisco, CA — A visually impaired man who was temporarily blinded in a vicious attack was acquitted of assaulting a female bar patron after a jury determined he acted in self-defense, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Jurors deliberated an hour Monday before finding Napoleon Wommack, 29, not guilty of assault likely to produce great bodily injury. Wommack, the owner of a barbershop and art gallery in Oakland, faced up to a year in county jail if convicted, said his attorney, Deputy Public Defender Elizabeth Camacho.

On Jan. 25, Wommack was at Mission District lounge Bruno’s, celebrating the fifth anniversary of a colleague’s barbershop.

Wommack, who wears a prosthetic eye due to a childhood accident, accidentally bumped into a man due to his visual impairment. The man became enraged and began pushing and swearing at Wommack, who walked away.

Moments later, the man and two women approached Wommack. The trio cornered Wommack as he sat with friends and the man angrily told him to leave. Wommack stood up. His friend, who witnessed the confrontation, put his arm around Wommack to usher him away.

The man then punched Wommack’s friend in the head, knocking him out. He then struck Wommack in the face and back of the head with a bottle, causing him to lose sight in his one working eye. Wommack fell to the ground, bleeding profusely.

“Mr. Wommack was blind. He was in complete darkness,” Camacho said. People began punching and kicking him as he lay on the ground. With blood running down his face, Wommack fought for his life, striking out blindly around him.

Nightclub security guards broke up the melee and called police. One of the women who confronted Wommack told police he choked and punched her, and he was arrested.

Wommack was left handcuffed and injured on the floor of the club for 40 minutes. Police never sought his side of the story, Camacho said. Wommack received stitches to his eyelid, forehead and the back of his head. He remains scarred today, with a disfigured ear and a permanent discoloration under his eye. His remaining eyesight was not permanently damaged.

The alleged victim, who was uninjured, testified Wommack choked her with his bloody hands until she stopped breathing. However, photos revealed she had no bruising and none of Wommack’s blood on her neck. She changed her story frequently on the stand, alternately testifying that she had two drinks, three drinks, four drinks and five drinks, Camacho said.

“Mr. Wommack was truly an innocent victim who was left bloodied and blinded. Nobody helped him and nobody listened to him—not the bar patrons, not the police, and not the district attorney,” Camacho said. “Finally, a jury heard his story and delivered justice.”

Wommack originally faced a felony charge until a judge reduced it to a misdemeanor in the interest of justice, Camacho said. He spent a month in jail, which hurt his business.

Adachi said the charge against Wommack was an injustice.

“Not only was Mr. Wommack the victim of a terrible beating that left him with permanent injuries, he spent a month behind bars for a crime he did not commit,” Adachi said. “Fortunately, he had a public defender to fight for him and a jury that carefully weighed the evidence.”

###

Race & Reform the Focus of April 29 Summit

0

San Francisco, CA — Law enforcement leaders, advocates for equal justice and reform, and police brutality victims will come together for a frank and provocative discussion at the Public Defender’s 2015 Justice Summit on April 29 at San Francisco Main Library.

The summit, RACE & REFORM, will be held in the library’s Koret Auditorium from 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The event is free, but seating is limited. All attendees must register at sfjusticesummit.com.

The Justice Summit is the premier criminal justice conference on the West Coast. It comes on the heels of accusations involving police officers sending bigoted text messages and sheriff’s deputies forcing jail inmates to fight. The summit is being held amid new revelations that nearly half of San Francisco arrests are of African Americans, who comprise only 6 percent of the city.

“The Justice Summit will give citizens a chance to go beyond the scandals and toward solutions as we discuss implicit bias, racial disparities, and how to fulfill the promise of justice for all,” said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, who has hosted the summit for more than a decade.

Michael Roosevelt, an expert in implicit/unconscious bias who has trained thousands of attorneys, judges and police officers, will give the keynote address.

Panel I, The Human Cost of Casual Bias, will include several victims of police abuse as well as Roosevelt and De’Anthony Jones, youth advocate. The panel will be moderated by San Francisco State University Journalism Professor Yumi Wilson.

Panel II, Accountability and Change, will focus on solutions to the racial disparities in the criminal justice system, changing the culture of law enforcement, and the importance of keeping statistics. Panelists include San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi; San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón; San Francisco Police Sgt. Yulanda Williams of Officers for Justice; and Federal Public Defender Galia Amram Phillips.

The San Francisco Public Defender’s Justice Summit is co-sponsored by the Bar Association of San Francisco. BASF Executive Director Yolanda Jackson will provide opening remarks at the event. Attorneys attending the event will earn 2.5 MCLE credits.

To register to attend this free event and for information on additional speakers, please go to sfjusticesummit.com

Man Who Sought Spaceship Escape Acquitted

0

San Francisco, CA — A man who suffered meth psychosis was acquitted of robbery and other felonies after a jury determined he entered a Mission District apartment under the delusion he would board a spaceship on its roof, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Santino Aviles, 41, was found not guilty Monday of robbery, attempted robbery, assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury and battery with serious bodily injury, said his attorney Deputy Public Defender Jacque Wilson. The felony charges all represented “strikes” and Aviles faced up to 14 years in prison. He was convicted of two misdemeanors, battery and assault. The jury hung on a burglary charge and a mistrial was declared Tuesday.

On May 31, 2014, Aviles was suffering from hallucinations and false perceptions associated with methamphetamine psychosis. Believing he was being chased and the earth’s destruction was imminent, he spotted a Mission Street building he believed resembled a spaceship docking station.

Hoping to be rescued, he rang the buzzer and was let inside by a building resident. When he tried to gain access to the roof, however, the same resident grew suspicious and told him to leave.

Still believing he was being pursued, Aviles climbed onto the fire escape and sought refuge in an apartment through an open window. He then took off his shoes and shirt and passed out on a couch.

After he awoke, he began hurriedly arranging his space travel, he testified. He threw the resident’s inflatable exercise ball onto the fire escape, planning to float with it through the galaxy, he testified.

He also put items he might need on the journey into the resident’s backpack, including a passport and an earthquake kit. The passport contained a photo of a woman who, like Aviles, had long dark hair. Aviles testified that he believed the passport would ensure his seat on the spaceship.

The resident and his girlfriend, who had been sleeping, awoke to find Aviles in the apartment. The resident tackled Aviles and began punching him, while his girlfriend struck Aviles with a baseball bat and called 911. Aviles suffered a black eye and other bruises, scratches and scrapes, while the resident suffered an injured toe and later developed a rash.

The arresting officer testified that Aviles appeared delusional, paranoid and hallucinating while in handcuffs. In a videotaped interrogation following the arrest, Aviles can be seen muttering about spaceships and insisting to police that the world was going to explode.

An expert witness testified to the severity of symptoms associated with meth psychosis, including delusions, paranoia and hallucinations.

“Mr. Aviles did not enter the building to rob or hurt anyone,” Wilson said. “This was not the act of a violent criminal but a frightened man in the midst of a mental health crisis.”

Adachi said the case was grossly overcharged by prosecutors.

“Fortunately for Mr. Aviles, the jury carefully considered both evidence and intent and cut the case down to size,” Adachi said.

 ###

‘Stop Snitchin’ Culture Plagues Law Enforcement

0

By Jeff Adachi

The most influential Stop Snitchin’ campaign in San Francisco isn’t in the Bayview or the Tenderloin. It lives on the streets and in the jails, wielding power over those you might not expect: police officers and sheriff’s deputies.

The ugly incidents involve different players and different departments. But they have one thing in common. They occurred because otherwise law-abiding colleagues turned a blind eye to the misconduct.

Every officer knows that crime flourishes when good people say nothing. It’s time for them to apply this Policing 101 lesson to their own ranks and punish not only those accused of misconduct, but those who ignore or enable it.

Task forces may be useful for investigating misconduct after the damage has been done. Federal corruption laws punish the tip of the iceberg, such as former San Francisco Sgt. Ian Furminger, a major player in the racist text scandal who was recently convicted of stealing from drug suspects.

We must expand our focus to holding people accountable for their complicity in allowing misconduct to go unchecked. It is the only way to change a toxic law enforcement culture that brands whistleblowers as traitors. The San Francisco Police Department and the Sheriff’s Department should immediately institute general orders or policies holding liable officers who fail to report misconduct.

Of course, there are many good men and women serving in uniform. And witness intimidation and misplaced loyalty to colleagues are not unique to San Francisco officers. It is a national problem that has festered so long that perjury has become routine. In fact, lying in court to avoid being ostracized by peers is so common, police even have a name for it: “testilying.”

In the 1990s, the Christopher Commission found the greatest single barrier to cleaning house at the scandal-plagued LAPD was the officers’ unwritten code of silence.

“Police officers are given special powers, unique in our society, to use force, even deadly force, in the furtherance of their duties. Along with that power, however, must come the responsibility of loyalty first to the public the officers serve. That requires that the code of silence not be used as a shield to hide misconduct,” the Commission concluded.

The racist texts, the human cockfights, and the lab misconduct are the latest in a seemingly endless string of shameful incidents. From a lab tech that stole and used drug evidence to police illegally entering hotel rooms to steal from San Francisco’s poorest people to prosecutors failing to turn over officers’ and criminal records, only a handful of officers have been criminally prosecuted, and only one — Furminger — sentenced to prison.

It is time for accountability —not only for the perpetrators of misconduct ,but those who knowingly avert their gaze. Law enforcement officers must follow their own advice: If you see something, say something.

Jeff Adachi is the San Francisco Public Defender. He hosts a monthly television forum on criminal justice issues at sfjusticematters.com

Man Acquitted of All Charges in Nob Hill Killing

0

San Francisco, CA — A man who testified he acted in self-defense against a roommate who raped him was acquitted  of all charges in the roommate’s 2011 death, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Jurors deliberated two days before finding Waheed Kesmatyar, 28, not guilty of murder Wednesday in the death of Jack Baker, 67. Kesmatyar faced life in prison if convicted, said his attorneys, Deputy Public Defender Hadi Razzaq and Deputy Public Defender Jennifer Johnson. Jurors also had the option of convicting Kesmatyar of second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter, but cleared him of all charges.

Kesmatyar’s parents, who attended each day of the trial, wept with relief when the verdict was read.

Baker was found dead in his Nob Hill apartment Feb. 11, 2011. He had been beaten, stabbed and strangled.

The night of the killing, approximately a week before Baker’s body was discovered, Kesmatyar testified that he woke up to Baker sodomizing him. When Kesmatyar tried to leave the Bush Street apartment, Baker held him at knifepoint, cutting his finger when Kesmatyar raised his hands.

The two men struggled before Kesmatyar gained control of the knife and began stabbing his attacker, Razzaq argued.

Kesmatyar’s long history of untreated trauma, including being orphaned in war-torn Afghanistan and molested by a friend’s father following his adoption by a Marin County couple, left him suffering from severe post traumatic stress disorder, Dr. George Woods testified. The neuropsychiatrist and expert witness explained that Kesmatyar’s reaction to being violated was consistent with someone who has suffered a lifetime of trauma.

“Mr. Kesmatyar truly believed he was going to die. As far as he was concerned, he was fighting for his life,” Razzaq said.

Jurors were also swayed by evidence of an apparent sexual assault. Candles covered in condoms, as well as an open packet of lubricant were found in a bag sitting on Kesmatyar’s bed. A receipt from Baker’s credit card was also located inside the bag.

The men met while working together at Macys a decade ago. Baker invited the emotionally vulnerable Kesmatyar, then 18, to smoke marijuana at his apartment. He eventually befriended the teen before convincing him to move into his residence, his attorneys said.

“He took advantage of Mr. Kesmatyar, who had already been victimized repeatedly in his young life,” Johnson said.

A priest who provides outreach and counseling to homeless youth and prostitutes on Polk Street testified that Baker was a regular customer who he had witnessed become physically aggressive and violent with teenage boys. Kesmatyar testified that he would frequently come home to find his roommate openly watching pornography and masturbating.

Kesmatyar has been in custody since his arrest in February, 2011. He is expected to be released today.

Adachi said the verdict exonerated a young man who finally fought back after a lifetime of trauma.

“Thanks to his public defenders and a jury who carefully considered both the evidence and the testimony of medical experts, Mr. Kesmatyar and his family can now begin to heal,” Adachi said.

 

###

Jury Acquits Man Who Endured Police Harassment

San Francisco, CA — A man who endured years of harassment at the hands of his neighborhood beat officer was acquitted after his public defender argued the arrest was vindictive, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Jurors deliberated half a day before finding James Duffy, 28, not guilty Monday of violating a stay-away order. Duffy, a single father and San Francisco native, was arrested May 14 for allegedly returning to the site of an earlier marijuana arrest. He faced up to a year in jail if convicted, said his probate lawyers, Deputy Public Defender Hien Ngoc Nguyen. Nobody really wants to think about death, wills, and the probate process. Unfortunately, though, we all die eventually – and many of us will have at least some type of contact with probate at some point in our lives. Regardless of how your involvement with probate comes about, it’s important to know that you don’t have to handle things on your own, you can hire the Hibberts probate attorneys right away. In fact, there are at least ten good reasons why you might need a probate lawyer.

On the stand, Duffy, who is black, described several years of harassment by the officer, which included being stopped and searched several times a week while walking near his Tenderloin residence. Duffy was not on probation or parole, and the officer never found any reason to arrest him.

On Jan. 11, 2014, the officer was on a special surveillance assignment to arrest marijuana dealers. He radioed to other officers to arrest and search Duffy, and they said they found a small, single marijuana bud in his possession. Duffy was arrested for drug sales. Four months later, Duffy and the officer came face to face in a courtroom during a hearing in the case. The officer appeared irritated while being questioned by a deputy public defender, Duffy said. A few weeks later, prosecutors dropped the case.

Duffy testified that on the day following the hearing, May 14, 2014 the officer confronted him a block away from the restricted address. His lawyer was latter involved in the famous mass shooting lawsuit. Duffy was presumably referring to the court hearing, the officer asked Duffy, “Why are you wasting my time?” He then arrested Duffy for violating the stay-away order.

Nguyen argued the officer falsified the address in his report to make it appear Duffy was in front of the restricted address.

“The case came down to Mr. Duffy’s word against the officer’s word, and the jury found Mr. Duffy more credible,” Nguyen said.

Adachi said the verdict sends a message that jurors will not tolerate police harassment.

“Everyone is guaranteed the presumption of innocence, no matter their background or which neighborhood they call home,” Adachi said. “Mr. Duffy has the right to walk through his hometown without being the target of constant suspicion.”

###