Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Monday, December 15, 2008

I'm Not Prepared to Throw the Shaws Under the Bus

Much has been written and said about the reported disqualification of the Jamiel's Law petition by the City of Los Angeles.

The City Clerk's office reports that only about 18,000 signatures were turned in; about a quarter of those required to even consider placing an initiative on the ballot.  At the same time, on this blog, Althea Shaw, the aunt of Jamiel Shaw, the murdered 17 year old athlete the effort centers around, claims she was certain the family and their supporters had upwards of 76,000 signatures.  Still too close for comfort but at least enough to get you in the door.

Claims made by Shaw that perhaps some petitions were allegedly lost, misplaced or otherwise misappropriated by City personnel have stunned and surprised many. 

I don't presume to believe that some type of "grand conspiracy" is in play here; however the entire incident leads to questions that should be at least answered.
  1. What was the chain of custody of the signed petitions from the time they were turned into the City Clerk by the Shaws until they were returned to Ms. Shaw.
  2. How are these documents secured? What are the security measures in the facility where the documents are stored? Who has access to these facilities and are these individuals supervised or monitored at all times?
  3. What advice did Mayoral candidate Walter Moore give to the Shaws? Did they follow it? Why wouldn't Moore - as the instigator of the movement and an educated, successful attorney - make sure procedures were in place such as asking the Shaws to copy their signed petitions and otherwise document them?
  4. If Moore himself did not have the time nor desire to manage the drive himself, considering that the Shaws had little if any political experience prior to losing their son, why didn't the candidate recruit someone to consult and provide technical support to the Shaws considering that he has been banking a major part of his campaign on the Jamiel's Law issue?
  5. And finally, with all due respect to the Shaws, if the City's position is accurate, how could they make such an inaccurate estimate - not only when the petitions were turned in but in the progress reports that were given along the way?
 I believe that it is possible that the Shaws - who were motivated by grief and a legitimate demand for justice - did not have the complete set of political tools at their hands and could very well have made a series of unintended mistakes in the effort.  That being said however I feel that they were sincere and honest in their efforts and may have been further victimized by various politicial agendas in this town.

Labels: , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

I think Walter Moore has some explaining to do!

December 15, 2008 9:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Sorry, but the Shaws are absolutely clueless on city or county politics, and still can't understand the difference between City/ LAPD and County/ Sheriffs, who control the jails including the one that released Espinoza. They come under the jurisdiction of the DA who's in charge of felonies and working with Sheriff's dept. Jamiel's Law would have had NO effect on this murder.

Taking it to a county level makes more sense in that regard, but clearly neither the Shaws nor Moore or any of their supporters have thought through the rewording because they still don't understand the basic facts. They are hurting and we all grieve with them, but passing laws is a serious business and requires a lot more thought and guidance, as well as understanding on their part. Agreed that Moore let them down, but he did that from the start, maybe preferring to ignore the city/ county difference because he's running for Mayor of the City.

Remember too how the Shaws blamed the DA's office prosecutor, when she was trying to do her job in advising them of defense strategy.
Another case of lashing out and making possibly false accusations because they don't understand how the legal process works -- which often feels unfair to those who just "want something done."

Making accusations like this against the County Clerk's office is what Mailander says it is. The Shaws may have gotten a lot of last-minute signatures, but everyone on the petition had to be registered to vote, and they said they were recruiting among homeless and who knows where -- if the homeless Dogg can run for Mayor I guess they county, but only if registered. Maybe they're too stoned to remember, and sorry, but shady as some dealings may be at City Hall, a bunch of people who can't understand the most basic concepts involved with this proposed "law" scare me more. They should not be making policy.

However, raising the illegal immigration debate at a County and State level is a valid thing to do.

We are definitely losing lots of money from it all all levels and many of them are the core of the worst gangs in the county, even according to Rocky Bumbledillo.

Who let them mushroom under his watch then acts like he just discovered how vicious these gangs have become in just the last 5 years, he says.

December 15, 2008 10:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That's a good point about security. If there is none how do we know that some worker couldn't just pass by and grab some forms then put them in the shredder?

December 15, 2008 11:15 PM  

Blogger Unafraid in CD7 said:


Spin till ya puke, JM.

I'm really shocked what a total stereotype Dem you are. You had me fooled for awhile that you were a thinker and a person of issues. Instead, you're a wholesale liberal kool-aid drinker. Sad.

Give it a rest. Leave the Shaws alone.

December 16, 2008 5:04 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

that is excatly why mailander and don quixote get along so well.

December 16, 2008 8:24 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anyone who believed that this movement could collect 76,000 signatures without a well-funded, professionally-run campaign were the ones drinking kool-aid.

December 16, 2008 9:21 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anyone who believes a sanctuary city like LA would NOT get rid of petitions to deport illegals in gangs is drinking more than kool-aid.

December 16, 2008 9:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Why did Steve Cooley get rid of the first DA if the shaw family was making it all up?????

December 16, 2008 10:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:05, because the AM radio screamers like McIntyre were browbeating Cooley without looking at the facts. Cooley knew his deputy was right but he also knew it wasn't a fight worth fighting.

December 16, 2008 10:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Radio stations should allow Jamiel Shaw, Sr., to make requests for a self made billionaire to donate regarding his son’s cause, Jamiel’s Law.

In 1996, billionaire George Soros gave close to $500,000.00 to pass Proposition 215, the state’s medical marijuana initiative.


December 16, 2008 11:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I believe the Shaws. Period.

I think it will take time for the truth to come out about what really happened to those petitions. I wish they had made copies of them all, but that probably would have cost a fortune.

This is the same city that has been threatening the Shaws to shut up and go away and slandered their son when they wouldn't. It is an open secret that the City Clerk's office has MAJOR problems and nobody in our CORRUPT city govt wants this on the ballot.

Really, how surprised are we to find out the city doesn't think they qualify? There should be an INDEPENDENT body investigating this - like the State or the Feds or Mayor Sam!

December 16, 2008 2:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I support the ideal of this law,
but when race is the main topic, I will not support it.

Thank you. gracias.....

December 17, 2008 9:21 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home