A R

EPORT

 

BY

 

THE

 ACLU F

OUNDATIONOF

 S

OUTHERN

 C

ALIFORNIA

www.aclu-sc.org

M

AY

 1997

 

C

ONTENTS

Section I:Introduction and Study Design..........................................................................................1Section II:Review of Violent Crime, Calls for Serviceand Felony Drug Arrests in 19 LAPD Reporting Districts...................................................7Section III:Discussion and Conclusions............................................................................................36

A R

EPORT

 

BY

 

THE

 ACLU F

OUNDATIONOF

 S

OUTHERN

 C

ALIFORNIA

M

AY

 1997

1616 Beverly BoulevardLos Angeles, California 90026213. 977. 9500www.aclu-sc.org

 

False Premise/False Promise:The Blythe Street Gang Injunction

ls

May19971

I

N

 D

ECEMBER

, 1987,

THE

 L

OS

 A

NGELES

 C

ITY

 A

TTORNEY

’

S

 O

FFICE

 introduced what it characterized as apowerful new weapon in the fight against gang violence. This weapon was the court injunction issued against namedalleged members of the Playboy Gangster Crips gang operating in the Cadillac-Corning neighborhood of West LosAngeles. The injunction barred them from congregating together, talking on the street, littering or remaining in public formore than five minutes at a time.In a statement to the media at the time, City Attorney James K. Hahn lauded the court action as “the nation’s firstlegal offensive against a street gang,” and vowed:“We intend to use the prohibition against harassing citizens to give law-abiding residents...some much-needed reliefagainst these gang members.” (United Press International, Dec. 11, 1987.)Since the Playboy Gangster Crips case was filed nearly 10 years ago, the injunction tactic has received increasingattention and has been hailed as a quick, reliable way to rescue neighborhoods from the grip of criminal street gangs andthe terror of gang-related violent crime. By early 1996, gang injunctions had developed such broad appeal that Gov. PeteWilson included in his budget for submission to the Legislature a proposal to set up a $2.5 million “Gang CivilInjunction Fund.” The stated purpose was to “provide grants to local prosecutors and underwrite the costs of obtainingand enforcing additional injunctions against threatening or intimidating gang activities.” (Office of the Governor,Governor’s Budget Summary, Jan. 10, 1996, “State and Local Alliance for Public Safety,” page 2.)The Playboy Gangster Crips case received high levels of media and public attention and the injunction tactic hassince been described, in a 1997 U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance monograph (“Urban Street Gang Enforcement,January, 1997, page 100), as a concept pioneered in Los Angeles. However, it was not until 1993 that the City Attorneymoved to obtain what was then—and may still be—the most heavily promoted gang injunction ever sought.On Feb. 22, 1993, the City Attorney’s Office filed for an injunction (

People v. Blythe Street Gang

, Los AngelesCounty Superior Court, LC020525) against as many as 500 members of the Blythe Street Gang, a Latino street gang.The court filing charged that the gang had transformed a quiet Panorama City neighborhood into an occupation zone inwhich innocent residents were held captive in their own apartments by violent criminal predators and victimized if theywent outside their homes.In a media statement at the time, City Atty. Hahn said:“The Blythe Street neighborhood is under occupation by an organized group of criminals involved in everythingfrom drug trafficking to murder. This is a gang of brutal outlaws.” (Reuters North American Wire, Feb. 22, 1993.)Civil libertarians and constitutional law experts argued unsuccessfully at the time that the injunction should bedenied. Organizations—including the American Civil Liberties Union—that opposed the tactic contended that it wouldlead to cases of mistaken identity and that the court order sought by the city would, in effect, outlaw otherwise legalactivity, such as carrying on conversations, visiting with friends or possessing tools like screw drivers and pocket kniveswhose use is not, per se, a crime. Opponents contended that existing laws and law enforcement techniques could be betterused to counter the criminal actions of the Blythe Street Gang.But these arguments did not prevail, in part because of a political climate that had evolved out of understandabledesperation. It reflected a desire to abate—even at the expense of fundamental constitutional rights—the perceived reign

S

ECTION

 I

Introductionand Description of Study Design