Where Is the Missing Video in David Silva In-Custody Death?

Rebeldes — Wed, 22 May 2013 19:59:38 +0000

Last week, we shared one part of Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood’s press conference discussing the cell phone videos seized the night of the May 8 in-custody death of David Silva in Bakersfield.

LiveLeak has also run another video of the Youngblood conference. In that conference, there were questions about one of the missing cell phone videos taken by witnesses.

Earlier this week, attorney Daniel Rodriguez released one of the cell phone videos taken by his clients on May 8. He also told local outlets that he believes that the second video, the one that is still missing, was “the more incriminating video” that supposedly shows batons being used against Silva. Rodriguez also believes that police committed unconstitutional acts against their clients, and he said that a lawsuit will be filed on behalf of his clients.

Rodriguez also gave a 9-minute interview where he reveals more details about his clients and what they said happened that night. According to Rodriguez, Kern County police were discouraging his clients from posting the videos onto social networks and YouTube.

So, the question is a simple one: where is the missing video? Was it ever taken? Or was it deleted? Rodriguez’s interview is quite telling, and it is clear that this case is getting more and more complicated.

Online Communities Begin to Rally Around In-Custody Death of David Sal Silva

Rebeldes — Wed, 22 May 2013 19:18:10 +0000

Gradually the in-custody death of David Sal Silva on May 8 in Bakersfield is beginning to get more and more attention through alternative media and online communities. For example, a new online forum called Justice for David Sal Silva has been formed. The forum contains links to news articles and discussion threads about the case. It also includes a call to action, petitioning Kern County to record police actions through the use of body cameras.

That post includes the following information, before providing information about why police should be equipped with body cameras:

A camera is good cop’s best friend, whether on the dashboard of his squad car, in the hands of a citizen, or worn on his chest. Good cops, who are doing their jobs properly and legally, have nothing to fear from video.
Bad cops, on the other hand, have everything to fear from photography. A photographic record of their misdeeds is their worst enemy.
In the last few years, Kern County has paid out $10,500,000 in just two major cases:
$6,000,000 in the case of James W. Moore, who was beaten to death in 2005 by as many as 14 Kern county jailers while he was strapped to a gurney
$4,500,000 in the case of Jose R. Lucero, a mentally disturbed man who was beaten to death in 2010 by several Kern County deputies in front of his parents.
The beating death this month of David Sal Silva will likely cost Kern County taxpayers another $5,000,000 or more, and there is a good chance that the warrantless home invasion in a attempt to seize video evidence will result in an additional lawsuit and payout.
So when all is said and done, Kern County taxpayers will have coughed up $15,000,000 or more, and that’s just for the major cases. There are plenty of lesser cases to add to the tally.

Meanwhile, online outlets like LiveLeak, PolicyMic, and The Inquistr have all covered the Silva case, as well as The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, CNN, NBC News, Salon, the HuffPost, and AOL. A Google search of “David Silva death” has generated 16,000,000 results as of this posting. There is also a hashtag on Twitter called #Justice4David that is starting to get more tweets, but nowhere near the level of more publicized cases, like the Trayvon Martin case. However, a Facebook meme from Occupy Wall Street has gone viral. That meme was originally posted on the Facebook page of Policing the Police, where the photo has also gone viral.

Latino Rebels has also learned that prominent Latino civil rights organizations have started to examine the case and are discussing how best to respond to it. Last Friday on CNN Latino, the Rebels’ Charles García discussed the case. In the following video, which is in Spanish, CNN mentions how Latino Rebels was the first national Latino news outlet to cover the case. We published our first piece on May 13, and we will continue to stay close to the case.

Undocumented German Homeschooling Family Rick Santorum Didn’t Want Deported Loses Asylum Bid

Rebeldes — Wed, 22 May 2013 06:42:56 +0000

Earlier in the spring, our publisher wrote a piece about the irony of Rick Santorum hoping that an undocumented German homeschooling family would win an asylum case and not get deported back to Germany.

Looks like Santorum’s pleas and the pleas of many U.S. homeschooling families didn’t get heard. Last week the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Cincinnati, denied the Romeike family a request for political asylum.

A German family seeking asylum in the U.S. so they can home-school their children lost their appeal in federal court on Tuesday (May 14), but their lawyers say they’re prepared to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case.
The German government persecuted the Romeike family for their faith, said Mike Donnelly, a lawyer with the Home School Legal Defense Association, a religious organization that is representing the Romeike family.
“It is treating people who home-school for religious or philosophical reasons differently,” he added.
The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagrees. The U.S. grants safe haven to people who have a well-founded fear of persecution, but not necessarily to those under governments with laws that simply differ from those in the U.S., Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote in the court’s decision.
“The German authorities have not singled out the Romeikes in particular or homeschoolers in general for persecution,” he wrote for the three-judge panel in the case, Uwe Romeike v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Uwe Romeike said in an email on Wednesday that his family began home schooling to protect their children from bullying and teachings they didn’t agree with.
“As we were confronted with opposition to our choice we began to feel more and more that our faith required us to homeschool our children,” he said.
Uwe and Hannelore Romeike moved their five children to Tennessee (a sixth child has since been born) in 2008 to escape thousands of dollars in fines and increasing pressure from local police and education officials to enroll their children in school. All German parents are required by law to send their children to a state-recognized school, whether public or private.

FYI: The Romeikes are still undocumented, not matter how you spin it. Life sure is tough sometimes. Here’s hoping the Romeikes talk about the other stories of undocumented families who face deportation every day when the German family appeals the decision to the Supreme Court. Amazing how they can do that, while thousands and thousands of other families living in the shadows can’t.

VIDEO: A 9-Year-Old Kid Schools Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel

Rebeldes — Tue, 21 May 2013 23:01:23 +0000

Leave it to a 9-year-old boy to speak out against the school closings in Chicago.

Here is what the Chicagoist has to say about Asean Johnson, the boy in the video:

Meet Asean Johnson. He is nine years old, and he is a third-grader at Marcus Garvey Elementary. He was downtown on Monday at the rally to protest the city’s plan to close dozens of Chicago’s public schools, where he delivered this powerful speech. His school is on the list of closures, and if closed, Asean will be heading to Mount Vernon Elementary.
Asean has been active in the movement to save his school, appearing at rallies and delivering speeches to the school board and district leaders. He was featured in a Sun-Times editorial, which also pointed out the receiving school Mount Vernon Elementary has lower test scores than Garvey. Watch this interview with Asean from Monday.

Company Offers (Then Drops) Real Classist “Ghetto” Tours of the South Bronx

Tanisha Love Ramirez — Tue, 21 May 2013 22:39:36 +0000

This past Sunday, the New York Post printed an article about a company called Real Bronx Tours and how its tour guides promised tourists “a ride through a real New York City GHETTO.”

The article detailed how a tour guide, Lynn Battaglia, led tourists through the South Bronx, ridiculing its neighborhoods, defaming its history and mocking its residents—some of whom were in line at a local food pantry!

In this excerpt from the New York Post, the author describes Battaglia’s derisive comments about the borough’residents.

As the bus idled across from historic St. Ann’s Episcopalian Church, Battaglia launched into a description of the crime, poverty and violence that plagued the South Bronx during the 1970s recession.
As she spoke, a line of two dozen poor people — including one man visibly agitated by the onlookers — waited for handouts from the church pantry.
‘I don’t know what that line’s about, but every Wednesday we see it,’ Battaglia told the tourists. ‘We see them go in with empty carts, and we see them come out with carts full.’

It’s hard to see who knows less about the Bronx—Battaglia or her customers. According to the Post article, Battaglia continued to spew prejudiced misinformation, from telling tourists that the derogatory use of the word “pig” for police officers originated in the Bronx, to telling the tourists that if during the 1970s someone wanted to die, they would have been “in the right neighborhood.”

Bronxites are understandably livid. Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz slammed Battaglia as “the biggest fool on the planet” and a group called “Bronx Centric!: Movers and Shakers” have started a petition on Change.org to end Real Bronx Tours’ “ghetto gawking” tours.

The group appeals to Bronxites—and all New Yorkers, really—to sign a petition that calls for Real Bronx Tours to “Stop exploiting the Bronx by giving “ghetto gawking” tours. This is racist, classist, and plays on stereotypes.”

So far, the petition has been signed by 200 people, with many of them decrying the negative stereotypes being perpetuated and the negative aspects of the borough’s past that continue to be held against a new generation of Bronxites.

Here are testimonials from some of the supporters of the petition:

Santa Arocho BRONX, NY
I grew up in the South Bronx, was never mugged, earned a bachelor’s degree at an Ivy League school and I am an education administrator living in the Bronx. I am proud of the Bronx and the teachers, church community and my family who supported me and helped me become who I am today.
Gregg Gruber BRONX, NY
BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE THE WORLD SEE US FOR MORE THAN THE NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF OUR PAST!!
Kimberly Beazer BRONX, NY
The Bronx is a thriving and growing city full of many positive people and things. These stereotypes need to stop!

Today’s South Bronx is a far cry from the South Bronx that was “burning” four decades ago. It has a rich and beautiful history, present and future. It is home to many bright, driven and diverse people. The Bronx’s Grand Concourse—a street Battaglia made fun of during the tour written about in the New York Post— proudly boasts the names of the Bronx’s most famous former residents, including Rita Moreno, La India, Joy Bryant and Regis Philbin, to name a few. Every year since 1991, the Bronx hosts Bronx Week—a week dedicated to celebrating the Bronx, its residents and the contributions that each have made to the city, state and world. As it happens, Bronx Week ended on the day the Post article was published.

As of Monday, May 20, 2013—one day after the Post article was printed—Real Bronx Tours no longer offers “a ride through a real city GHETTO” on its site. Instead, the tour advert reads:

Get off the beaten path and see more of New York than just Manhattan. Let us show you the Bronx as it really is, a borough of diverse ethnic groups and neighborhoods, cultural institutions and surprising natural beauty.

That’s more like it.

Attorney Releases Witness Cell Phone Video of David Silva Case

Rebeldes — Tue, 21 May 2013 18:03:17 +0000

UPDATE (from the Los Angeles Times): Rodriguez told ABC23 that “the more incriminating video was one on the other cell phone.” He said that video was shot “while the batons were swinging.” Rodriguez added the second phone was returned to his client with no video. If a video was erased from that phone, he said, it could not be recovered because of the type of the device.

After much anticipation, attorney Daniel Rodriguez finally released a cell phone video taken by one of his clients on May 8 in Bakersfield, when David Sal Silva died in custody. This video was from one of the cell phones initially seized by Kern County police later that night. Rodriguez also raised questions about whether another cell phone video was deleted.

Here is what local news reported:

“The question becomes, was the video ever there? If it was, was it deleted? Was it extracted? And for this kind of cell phone camera, you cannot tell whether it was deleted, extracted, or whether it was ever filmed. We can’t tell,” Rodriguez said.
Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood held a press conference last week where he also questioned if there was any video on the other cell phone.
“Was there a video on that second phone or was there not? I hope to God the FBI can give me that answer,” Youngblood said.
23ABC asked Rodriguez if his client verified that there was a video on the phone and Rodriguez said he is also trying to piece together the information.
“Did she verify it? Did she look at it? I don’t know for a fact. I’m assuming from what I’ve read but when I met with her, I did not ask her that question,” Rodriguez said.
And there are more questions than answers as this investigation continues.
“I’m asking the public to be patient. This is troubling. It’s not just troubling for the public, for the news media, it’s troubling for me,” Youngblood said.

Here is the raw video published by the Los Angeles Times:

Here is what the Times reported:

Silva died May 8 about an hour after the altercation, during which authorities say Kern County sheriff’s deputies wielded batons to control Silva. The footage made public Monday does not show any of the baton strikes. A grainy security surveillance video obtained earlier by The Times showed deputies swing batons toward a man on the ground.
The latest footage to become public is from a cellphone in the possession of attorney Daniel Rodriguez; according to the TV station, the phone belongs to one several witnesses to the beating. The cellphone has already been analyzed by the FBI, along with another phone.

Ríos Montt Genocide Conviction Annulled by Guatemala’s Highest Court

Rebeldes — Tue, 21 May 2013 09:19:38 +0000

Several outlets have reported tonight that the genocide conviction of former Guatemalan dictator Efraín Ríos Montt has been annulled. This is what Reuters reported: “Guatemala’s constitutional court on Monday overturned a genocide conviction against former dictator Efrain Rios Montt, throwing out all proceedings in his case since a dispute broke out last month over who should hear it.”

“

On May 10, Ríos Montt was found guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity. He was sentenced to 80 years in prison, according to Reuters, for “overseeing the deliberate killings by the armed forces of at least 1,771 members of the Maya Ixil population during his 1982-83 rule.”

Tweets from @NISGUA_Guate, which has been covering the trial from the very beginning, confirmed the news.

Reports from Guatemala indicate Constitutional Court has upheld challenge to #GenocideGT process, sentence annulled & trial to be set back.
— NISGUA (@NISGUA_Guate) May 21, 2013

CC orders #GenocideGT trial annulled from April 19 on, unclear at this moment what court will proceed with case from this point.
— NISGUA (@NISGUA_Guate) May 21, 2013

Today confirms what we already knew: Guatemala still has a long road ahead in the struggle against impunity. #GenocideGT
— NISGUA (@NISGUA_Guate) May 21, 2013

Full impact of CC ruling will take time to be sorted out, we await analysis from partners in Guatemala. Our hearts are with the survivors.
— NISGUA (@NISGUA_Guate) May 21, 2013

CC anula sentencia por GENOCIDIO y confirma: GUATEMALA sigue secuestrada por la impunidad!!!!
— H.I.J.O.S. Guatemala (@HijosGuatemala) May 21, 2013

Reporter Xeni Javier provided more details about the decision:

The language of the court ruling specifies that the concluding phase of the trial has been thrown out, along with the verdict and 80-year prison sentence. It states that the phase of the trial in which victim testimony was delivered is still intact. But it’s possible that this effectively means the trial is annulled, and that there must be a new trial, or that there is no posssibility of a guilty verdict. Reporters and international observers I’ve spoken to aren’t exactly sure what is next, as far as whether a trial on the same charges will in fact be re-convened and repeated, or whether Rios Montt, 86, is now guaranteed to be a free man for the rest of his life.

The One Cuéntame Video You Have to See: The Diary of Stephanie Pucheta

Rebeldes — Tue, 21 May 2013 02:31:59 +0000

Watch.

Just watch.

For more information, go to Deport The Hate.

García Padilla: Puerto Ricans Must Move Forward Together in Status Question

Rebeldes — Mon, 20 May 2013 13:45:02 +0000

Today, Puerto Rican governor Alejandro García Padilla (D), the leader of the island’s status quo commonwealth party, wrote a piece for The Hill in response to a statehood bill submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives on May 15 by Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi, the leader of the island’s pro-statehood New Progressive Party.

Alejandro García Padilla

Here is an excerpt of what he wrote:

In their zeal to attempt to demonstrate support for statehood, the New Progressive Party has worked tirelessly to mischaracterize the results of the plebiscite – so much so that both houses of the Puerto Rican legislature felt it necessary to pass a joint resolution on Wednesday to set the record straight.

The governor then closes with the following:

Every Puerto Rican agrees that any self-determination that is fair, transparent and democratic should give an equal opportunity to each and all of the viable options with respect to our relationship with the United States. I commend President Obama for his proposal to hold a new plebiscite in Puerto Rico, which is an act that acknowledges that any fair self-determination process must include all valid options: statehood, independence, free association and Commonwealth.
While Puerto Ricans may continue to have different views concerning our relationship with the United States, we should be united in our desire to improve the lives of our fellow Puerto Ricans. With unemployment still high and economic growth still not at our desired level, there is much work to be done to create the environment businesses and families need to thrive.
Since I took office in January, my administration has worked tirelessly to create and implement new economic development policies and crime-reducing strategies. For example, the Jobs Now Act, which provides incentives to new and existing companies based in Puerto Rico, will help create an additional 50,000 new jobs during the first 18 months of my administration. And the security efforts launched by my administration have brought about an across-the-board reduction in all crime indexes.
It is time to move beyond the election cycle and focus on the many challenges at hand. Puerto Ricans are yearning for its leaders to come together and work to create a better future for all.

Pierluisi: Puerto Ricans Living on Mainland Should Not Be Allowed to Vote on Island’s Status

Rebeldes — Sun, 19 May 2013 21:49:07 +0000

On May 15, Puerto Rico’s Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi (D), a non-voting member of the U.S. House of Representatives, submitted the following bill to Congress:

PUERTO RICO STATUS RESOLUTION ACT

Full Text Below is a simple rendition of Congress’ official bill text.

1. Short title
This Act may be cited as the Puerto Rico Status Resolution Act.
2. Findings and purpose
(a) Findings
Congress finds the following:
(1) In 1898, Puerto Rico became a United States territory and persons born in Puerto Rico have been granted United States citizenship by law since March 2, 1917.
(2) Puerto Rico has been granted authority over local matters that is similar to the authority that the several States possess, but Puerto Rico remains subject to the powers of Congress under the Territory Clause of the Constitution of the United States.
(3) The approximately 3,700,000 residents of Puerto Rico do not have a democratic form of government at the national level, because United States citizens residing in the territory are disenfranchised in the election for the President and the Vice President of the United States, are not represented in the United States Senate, and their one representative in the United States House of Representatives can only vote in committees of the United States House of Representatives.
(4) The Federal Government may—and often does—treat Puerto Rico and its residents unequally under Federal program, tax, and other laws relative to the several States and the District of Columbia and their residents.
(5) On November 6, 2012, the Government of Puerto Rico held a two-part referendum. The first question asked voters if Puerto Rico should continue to have its present form of territorial status. Of the 1,798,987 voters who chose an option, 53.97 percent voted against continued territorial status.
(6) The second question asked voters to express their preference among the three possible alternatives to territorial status: statehood, independence, and nationhood in free association with the United States. Of the 1,363,854 voters who chose an option, 61.16 percent voted for statehood.
(7) The number of votes cast in favor of statehood exceeded the number of votes cast in favor of continued territorial status.
(b)Purpose
The purpose of this Act is to provide for a federally authorized ratification vote in Puerto Rico on the admission of Puerto Rico into the Union as a State and, if a majority of voters ratify Puerto Rico’s desire for statehood, to describe the steps that the President and Congress shall take to enable the admission of Puerto Rico as a State of the Union.
3. Ratification vote
The State Elections Commission of Puerto Rico is authorized to provide for a ratification vote on the admission of Puerto Rico into the Union as a State, in accordance with rules and regulations determined by the Commission, including qualifications for voter eligibility, with the following on the ballot:
“As a State:
(A) Puerto Rico would be permanently united to the other States of the Union.
(B) All provisions of the Constitution of the United States that apply to the States would apply to Puerto Rico.
(C) Individuals born in Puerto Rico would be United States citizens by virtue of the Constitution of the United States, instead of by virtue of laws of the United States.
(D) Puerto Rico would be treated equally with the other States in all Federal laws of general application.
(E) There would be a period of transition to statehood, during which equal treatment of Puerto Rico in program and tax laws would be phased in.
(F) Puerto Rico would be represented in the United States Senate by two Senators, in the United States House of Representatives by a number of Representatives in proportion to its share of the national population (and the number of Members of the House of Representatives would be increased by the same number), and for the election of the President and the Vice President of the United States by a number of votes in the Electoral College equal to the number of its Senators and Representatives.
(G) The Government of Puerto Rico, like the governments of the other States, would have permanent authority over all matters not delegated to the Federal Government or the people by the Constitution of the United States.
Do you want Puerto Rico to be admitted as a State of the United States? Yes__ No__”
4. Implementation
(a) Presidential action
If a majority of votes cast in the ratification vote held under section 3 are for the admission of Puerto Rico as a State of the Union, the President, not later than 180 days after the certification of the vote, shall submit to Congress legislation to admit Puerto Rico as a State of the Union on an equal footing with the several States in all respects, consistent with the terms of this Act.
(b) Legislative action
If a majority of votes cast in the ratification vote held under section 3 are for the admission of Puerto Rico as a State of the Union, this Act constitutes a commitment by Congress to act, through legislation, to admit Puerto Rico as a State of the Union on an equal footing with the several States in all respects, consistent with the terms of this Act.

Pierluisi made an appearance today on Univision’s “Al Punto” with Jorge Ramos to discuss the bill. Besides stating his case for the bill, Pierluisi did say the estimated 4 million Puerto Ricans living on the U.S. mainland should have a say in the statehood bill, and that current Governor Alejandro García Padilla, who favors the island’s current commonwealth system, is not allowing the voice of the Puerto Rican people to be heard.

Here is the video in Spanish.

Pierluisi and Ramos spent considerable time on especially the criticisms of the bill. Members of Pierluisi’s own pro-statehood party, including former governor Carlos Romero Barceló, believe that the bill leaves it way too open to allow Puerto Ricans living on the mainland to vote in a final binding plebiscite. Rep. José Serrano (D-NY) believes that mainland Puerto Ricans should be allowed to vote.

This is what Pierluisi told Ramos, “The decision must be in the hands of Puerto Ricans living on the island, 3.7 million American citizens residing in Puerto Rico.”

Pierluisi also did not support Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-IL), who believes the statehood bill is heavily biased towards a statehood option.

“In a democracy, at least in America, you vote where one resides. At the moment, one may consider whether Puerto Ricans in the diaspora could also express their views, but usually, what always happens is that you vote where you live.”

In the end, Pierluisi’s words were still very vague, and it is clear to us that this topic is no way near resolved, especially if Serrano and Gutiérrez are involved.