Neighbors in Hate
    On two occasions less than three weeks apart in January, solo intoxicated white men attacked employees of Jensen’s Truck Stop in North Ukiah while yelling racial depredations. They live within a couple of miles of each other in Redwood Valley, one on Madrone Lane, the other on Road D. 

            Ahmed Kahn, a man of Pakistani descent, purchased the truck stop last April, and most of the employees are also of Pakistani descent. They are all American citizens.

            On the afternoon of Wednesday, January 12,  a recently unemployed commercial truck driver Joseph Anthony Frank came into the truck stop office and convenience store clearly drunk and, after denouncing his nationality, threatened to kill the owner, Ahmed Khan. Frank allegedly punched Kahn in the face before leaving, according to police.

            Frank, 63, was arrested a short time later and just a few blocks away when a CHP officer recognized his truck from a Be On the Lookout notification.  Frank made $5,000 bail and was on for a setting of preliminary hearing when a very lenient deal was announced.

           Prosecutor Dan McConnell had initially charged Frank with DUI and making a terrorist threat. After that he changed the terrorist threat charge to assault and a felony hate crimes charge, Penal Code Section 422.7(a).
    On May 12, the date of what was to set a preliminary hearing, defense attorney David Eyster announced there was a proposed disposition of the case. McConnell was not there, reportedly because he had been discharged from the DA's office. (!) Shannon Cox represented the people.
    The deal was that the felony hate crime was reduced to a misdemeanor and the defendant would plea to that plus the DUI. He had a blood alcohol level of .21, almost three times the legal limit.
    Judge Leonard LaCasse sentenced Frank to serve 5 years probation, two days jail with credit for two days served, total fines of around $2600,  fifty hours community service, a ten year firearm prohibition, 9 months driving school, standard DUI probation, and a criminal protective order to stay away from Jensen's truck stop. In addition, DMV has revoked Frank's commercial drivers' license for one year.
    In court, Frank who had shaved off his beard and mustache appeared frail and contrite, and answered the judge in a low quavering voice. He had a Marine Corps tatoo on his right forearm, and numerous skulls suspended in rivulets of blood on his left forearm. The tall, gangly defendant was wearing cowboy boots,  levis and a mechanic type blue button up collar shirt with Van Halen logos.
    In mitigation, Eyster dismissed the death threat as an utterance in extreme intoxication. In addition, he recounted a story of the defendant's experiences in the days leading up to the incident that actually provide a motive for the hate crime. Frank had been working in the Los Angeles area as a driver for a trucking company working for rock and roll bands. The company suddenly went under and all employees were cut loose without pay.
    The defendant had a difficult journey back home to Redwood Valley, and according to Eyster went on a several days long drinking binge before ending up at Jensen's. "He should have stayed home, and if he had he would not be here today," said Eyster.
    What this shows is that the defendant's actions were not random or opportunistic, but a criminally misguided response to the loss of his livelihood, lashing out in jealous, drunken, nationalistic rage at a successful immigrant gainfully employed in his own business. This is typical of the conditions that give rise to fascism: confusion as to the causes of economic collapse, fear of public acceptance of racial diversity, and resentment against perceived success of  " minorities."
    One of the victims in the other case, Aqal Malik said, "It's enough."  I don't.

 


CODY CRAWFORD --- Joined the military as a healthy channel for his aggression

"F- the Arabs!"
          On April 30, the second and younger of two men who separately attacked Pakistani-American attendants at a truck stop on North State Street in Ukiah in January while hurling racial epithets and making threats was sentenced. Mendocino County superior court judge Richard Henderson sentenced Cody Cranford to 36 months felony probation plus 120 days in jail with credit for 45 served. He was on probation for DUI when he committed the offense, and was sentenced to 30 days concurrent with the other sentence. He had pled guilty in judge LaCasse's court to one felony assault with likelihood to cause great bodily harm and one felony hate crime, (Penal Code 422.85) in return for a promise there would be no state prison time at the outset.
    The victims were traumatized psychologically, but did not require medical treatment after the incident.
    Henderson also required the defendant to attend anger management counseling and AA sessions.
    Prosecutor Dan O'Connell originally charged the defendant with two assaults and two hate crimes as there were two victims in the case. He later reduced the charges to one assault and one hate crime and told me the other charges would be dismissed but used at sentencing, (Harvey waiver). But at the plea, the prosecutor forgot to get the Harvey waiver.
    Public defender Eric Rennert was eloquent in using the absence of the Harvey waiver and he use of all four counts in the probation report based on hearsay testimony from sheriff deputies about what the victims recounted after the attack. The probation department noted that Cranford would be a poor candidate for probation because he was on probation at the time.
    In mitigation, Rennert offered that Cranford had joined the military (!) and would apologize to the court.
    Judge Henderson in handing down the sentence noted that the defendant was deeply motivated by animosity to the victims for their national origin, which was an embarrasment to the principles on which the country was founded. (!) He also said it was based in ignorance in that at the time, Cranford apparenlty did not even know the true national origin of the victim.
      Cranford who had been seen smirking while in custody in earlier appearances appeared shaken by the sentence and hung his head, covering his face with his hand. When I sked him if he knew the other assailant shook his head in the negative.
    When I asked one of the victims Aqual Malik what he thought of the sentence said it was OK that the convict deserved it. When I asked him if Crawford should have gotten more, he didn't answer. Apparent alleged copycat hate criminal Cody M. Cranford, 21,pled no contest March 18 to 2 of four counts in a separate attack on two employees of the same store.
    Cranford was also clearly intoxicated when he came into the Lovers Lane truck stop around 11 p.m. on January 29 and began demanding to use the phone, a ruse to interact with the two clerks on duty, Lateef Kamahl and Waqar Malik.

             When they referred him to the payphone outside and gave him change, he used the payphone but returned and demanded once again to use their phone. When they refused again, he became agitated and demanded to know where they were from. When one employee answered they were from Pakistan, he verbally abused them for their ethnicity causing a disturbance while other customers were inside the store. 

            According to testimony in Cranford’s preliminary hearing on February 16, Kamahl while standing in front of the counter reached for his phone to dial 911, but Cranford allegedly gabbed him by the sweater to prevent him from completing the call and punched him. Malik then tried to pick up the phone to dial 911 and the defendant punched him as well in order to prevent the call.

            MCSO deputy Andrew Porter continued to testify under questioning from ADA Dan McConnell that the defendant then grabbed Kamahl by his sweater and dragged him  50' out into the parking lot, threw him down on the ground and beat him. During this assault, Cranford was yelling nationalistic depredations, according to information Porter gathered from the victims. Malik exited the store and tried to intervene physically on Kamahl’s behalf.

            After Cranford fled the scene, the victims did call 911 as well as their boss Ahmed Khan who soon showed up. As deputy Porter continued to obtain information from the victims, he radioed in to Sheriff’s dispatch which broadcast an emergency BOLO for the suspect.

            In response, a number of deputies called in to report they had found the defendant in front of the bowling alley across the street, matching the description of the suspect: (not many people have naturally orange hair).

            Deputy Porter then conducted a field ID in which he drove Kamahl and Khan in his patrol vehicle within 25 yards away from where the defendant was being detained in front of the bowling alley across the street from the scene and he testified that Kamahl identified Cranford as the man who had assaulted him.

            The defendant was then lodged in Mendocino County jail on $150,000 bail. He was on probation for DUI.

            On the 16th public defender Eric Rennert ably defended Cranford, characterizing the incident as a “scuffle” during which his client had used “bad language” and argued that the prosecution had not established that the assault was likely to have caused grave bodily injury. He also pointed out that deputy Porter’s testimony was hearsay, which is allowed in preliminary hearings, but that the witness was paraphrasing the epithets Cranford had used, quoting from the victims accounts at the scene which were sketchy because they were in an emotional state of shock.

            What Porter did testify was that the defendant had declared several times, “We are American,” and demanded the victims “leave the country.” While he allegedly continued to punch the victim on the ground, the defendant used the “F” word over and over as an adjective and a verb. In the police car on the way to jail, the defendant told Porter he should not be arrested for assaulting “F-ing Arabs.” Pakistanis are largely not Arab, but Pashtun, Punjabi, and Sindhi. But for people like him, all Muslims are Arabs. 

            Cranford was initially charged with kidnapping, violations of civil rights, intimidation, assault, battery, and burglary. Later McConnell reduced these to two counts of felony assault, PC 245(a) (1) and two hate crimes felonies, PC Section 422, there being two victims. On March 18, with the understanding there would be no state prison time at the outset, Cranford pled guilty to one felony assault and one hate crime. Additional conditions are that Cranford abstain from alcohol and stay away from the business. He wa then released from custody after some seven weeks.
    Prosecutor was Dan McConnell, public defender was David Eyster.

Hate Crimes:

            Hate crimes are covered in sections of the state penal code starting with 422.55  They can be separate counts, misdemeanors or felonies and also enhancements of underlying felonies.

            California Penal Code 422.7(a) provides for a state prison or county jail sentence up to one year and a fine of up to $10,000. As enhancements, they can add one or more years of state prison time.
            California Rule of Court 4.330 adopted effective January 1, 2007. states that in sentencing a defendant under (a), the court must consider the goals for hate crime sentencing stated in rule 4.427(e).
           California Rule of Court 4.427( e) Hate crime sentencing goals states that when sentencing a defendant under this rule, the judge must consider the principal goals for hate crime sentencing. (1)The principal goals for hate crime sentencing, as stated in section 422.86, are: (A)Punishment for the hate crime committed; (B)Crime and violence prevention, including prevention of recidivism and prevention of crimes and violence in prisons and jails; and (C)Restorative justice for the immediate victims of the hate crimes and for the classes of persons terrorized by the hate crimes. (2)Crime and violence prevention considerations should include educational or other appropriate programs available in the community, jail, prison, and juvenile detention facilities. The programs should address sensitivity or similar training or counseling intended to reduce violent and antisocial behavior based on one or more of the following actual or perceived characteristics of the victim: (A)Disability; (B)Gender; (C)Nationality; (D)Race or ethnicity; (E)Religion; (F)Sexual orientation; or (G)Association with a person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics.
(3)Restorative justice considerations should include community service and other programs focused on hate crime prevention or diversity sensitivity. Additionally, the court should consider ordering payment or other compensation to programs that provide services to violent crime victims and reimbursement to the victim for reasonable costs of counseling and other reasonable expenses that the court finds are a direct result of the defendant's actions.

Widespread Hatred:

             In every region of the state, incidents have occurred in which racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities have been harassed, intimidated, assaulted and even murdered.  In some communities, acts motivated by bigotry have sparked widespread community disruption.

            Although reliable data on the incidence and severity of hate violence is not available, testimony from community organizations who receive and track reports; from law enforcement officials; and from victims, documents that violence motivated by bigotry is widespread in California.  In some communities reported hate violence appears to be increasing.

            A hate crime is any act of intimidation, harassment, physical force or threat of physical force directed against any person, or gamely, or their property or advocate, motivated either in whole or in part by hostility to their real or perceived race, ethnic background, religious belief, sex, age, disability, or sexual orientation, with the intention of causing fear or intimidation, or to deter the free exercise or enjoyment of any rights or privileges secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United State of California whether or not performed under color of law.

Civil Codes

            When hate violence is punishable under a criminal statute it is a hate crime.  It should be noted that civil statutes (as opposed to criminal statutes) may provide relief for some types of hate violence.

            The Ralph Act ," Civil Code sections 51.7 and 52--provides that it is a civil right for a person to be free of violence or its threat against the person or his or her property, because of a person's race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, political affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, age or disability or position in a labor dispute, or because a person is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics--(bases of discrimination are illustrative, rather than restrictive)

    Enforced by the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which prosecutes, and the Fair Employment and Housing Commission, which adjudicates, and by the Attorney General, any district or city attorney and by private attorneys.

Provides for civil penalties of up to $25,000 for perpetrators, civil remedies to victims of "hate violence," three times actual damages, but no less than $1000, punitive damages, injunctive relief and attorney's fees

             The Bane Act. Civil Code section 52.1 --provides protection from interference by threats, intimidation, or coercion or for attempts to interfere with someone's state or federal statutory or constitutional rights (these include association, assembly, due process, education, employment, equal protection, expression, formation and enforcement of contracts, holding of public office, housing, privacy, speech, travel, use of public facilities, voting, worship, and protection from bodily restraint or harm, from personal insult, from defamation, and from injury to personal relations)-- proof of "hate motivation" required, according to a 1994 Court of Appeal decision in Boccato v. City of Hermosa Beach

         Enforced by Attorney General, any district attorney or city attorney, or a private attorney