LOS ANGELES, Calif. – The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California is deeply disturbed by the Los Angeles County district attorney's decision not to prosecute an El Monte police officer who clearly violated the law by brutally kicking a suspect in the head even though the suspect posed no physical threat.

The following statement can be attributed to Peter Bibring, ACLU/SC staff attorney:

“The ACLU/SC appreciates the difficult, split-second decisions police must make in the heat of the moment. But while we give police officers great authority to detain, arrest, and even use force against Los Angeles county residents, that authority must be used lawfully. Here, video news footage on which the district attorney based its decision clearly shows that El Monte Police Officer George Fierro crossed the line of unlawful conduct when he charged at a suspect that was lying prone on the ground and kicked his head like a soccer ball.”

“As egregious as Fierro's unjustified blow to the suspect's head is, the district attorney's abdication of oversight responsibility in prosecuting police abuse cases is more troubling.
The district attorney's report isn't the adrenaline-fueled act of an officer after a car chase, but the considered decision of an agency charged with deciding what's legal and illegal after careful review of the evidence. The report goes beyond simply declining to prosecute, and bends over backwards to justify the officer's use of force. By effectively endorsing such a high-profile, flagrant violation, the district attorney's office gives a signal to police officers that they will face no consequences for unlawful uses of force.”

“In the case of officer Fierro, the district attorney suggests that he was justified in kicking the suspect in the head as a „distraction strike - because the suspect looked at him as he approached. But despite a prolonged and dangerous car chase, there was no impending threat on the officer once the suspect was cornered in a fenced yard, lying prone on the ground, with additional officers arriving seconds behind. The troubling conclusion raises serious questions about the judgment of the Justice System Integrity Division of the district attorney's office and its handling of police abuse cases in general.”

“Police abuse in Los Angeles County will continue until the district attorney's office holds officers to governing legal standards.”

A series of citations against a 67-year-old Army veteran for displaying the American flag upside down on federal property have been dismissed only days after the U.S. Attorney’s Office learned that the ACLU of Southern California was representing him in defense of his free speech rights.
Robert Rosebrock, who has been protesting the planned conversion of Veterans Administration property in the Brentwood area to a public park, received the dismissal order signed by a federal judge late yesterday. The order means that five citations Rosebrock received for displaying the American flag upside down as part of his protest have been dropped.
Rosebrock began protesting the planned transfer of VA land for use as a public park in March 2008. Since then he has virtually become a fixture outside the Brentwood-area property every Sunday, hanging a flag on a fence around it to draw attention to his viewpoint that the agency’s land is legally and morally bound to be used for the care and housing of veterans, particularly homeless veterans.
For more than a year, Rosebrock and his supporters hung the flag right side up, but in June they began hanging the flag upside down to signify their view that the property was in distress and that its transfer would endanger veterans. He received the first of five citations a few weeks later from federal law enforcement officers. Subsequently, Rosebrock got an e-mail from Lynn Carrier, associate director of the West Los Angeles Veterans Administration office, that said he “may not attach the American flag, upside down, on VA property” because “this is considered a desecration of the flag and is not allowed on VA property.”
“The government has no business telling Mr. Rosebrock that it is OK to hang the flag one way because it is fine with the message expressed, but that he cannot hang the flag another way because it expresses a different message that the government does not approve of,” said Peter Eliasberg, Manheim Family Attorney for First Amendment Rights and managing attorney for the ACLU/SC.
“Protecting the right of Americans to criticize government officials or their decisions is one of the key goals of the First Amendment of the Constitution,” Eliasberg added. “Displaying the flag upside down may be offensive to some, as burning the flag was in the Vietnam-war era. But in our society and in our courts, we have a long tradition of giving protesters wide latitude, and we uphold our principles as a free country in doing so.”

LOS ANGELES, Calif. – The director of the California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, Kristy Underwood, has written new policies that spell out prohibitions on discrimination in enforcement functions and narrow the board’s role in inspections conducted jointly with other agencies, as part of a settlement announced today in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU of Southern California and Seyfarth Shaw LLP on behalf of several African American barbers in the Riverside area.

The changes in the CBBC’s policies stem from a series of raids conducted by board inspectors in conjunction with local police in April 2008 at barbershops owned and heavily patronized by African Americans. The settlement helps ensure that the board will limit its inspections to its mandate of administrative enforcement of health, safety and business codes, and will never use its inspection authority as a pretext to allow law enforcement agencies to conduct warrantless searches for criminal activity under the pretense of a joint inspection. The new policy also prohibits racial profiling in enforcement actions.

“We credit the board with recognizing that these guidelines will help prevent the abuse of its inspection authority by law enforcement while allowing its inspectors to carry out their task of assuring the cleanliness and safety of barbershops and salons,” said Peter Bibring, a staff attorney for the ACLU/SC. “This settlement helps restore the barbers’ standing in the community, and will prevent other barbershop owners from being targeted for inspections based on race or other discriminatory factors.”

In April, armed Moreno Valley police officers accompanied by state barbering and cosmetology inspectors burst into five Moreno Valley barbershops and carried out searches reminiscent of narcotics raids, even though the purported reason for the inspections was to inspect for sanitation and licensing issues. The “inspections” were conducted only at barbershops owned and heavily patronized by African Americans.

“The raids intimidated our customers, and destroyed people’s sense of safety,” said Ray Barnes, who was a barber at the now-closed Fades Unlimited during the April raids. “These barbershops were places where people in the community came together, and I hope with this settlement the community’s trust will be restored.”

“The way we were treated made no sense,” said Kevon Gordon, owner of the Hair Shack, which was raided in April. “We’ve been cutting hair in Moreno Valley for over 20 years. We’ve got clients who’ve come to us since they were kids, who brought their kids to us, too. I’m just glad our struggle will help make sure it doesn’t happen to other barbers.”

Under the settlement, the CBBC adopted a formal policy against racial discrimination. Another new policy spells out that the board’s inspection activity is not to be used as a pretext for “any other” law-enforcement purpose, either by the CBBC or another agency.

The latter “is a key part of the settlement, because it will help to prevent police across the state from using business or health inspections by this board as a way to get around the constitutional requirement for search warrants,” said Rishi Puri, an attorney at Seyfarth Shaw LLP.

The lawsuit by Seyfarth Shaw and the ACLU/SC also named specific CBBC inspectors and the Moreno Valley Police Department, which is run by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. No settlement has been reached with those defendants, and the lawsuit against them continues.