News and Commentary: Major Hearing of the Gang Injunction Slated For Monday

In a press release issued on Friday, it was announced that on Monday in Woodland, lawyers representing defendants in the controversial West Sacramento “gang injunction” case will argue the court should not allow a Preliminary Injunction in the case as requested by the District Attorney.

A rally will occur among homeowners and community members from West Sacramento at the Yolo County Courthouse on Monday at 1 pm prior to a 1:30 PM hearing where the defense team will attempt to submit more than “100 affidavits from residents of West Sacramento claiming there is no need for the so-called “gang injunction,” but the DA is arguing that residents should not be allowed to speak.”

The defense will also question the veracity of statements issued by police officers.

“Residents of Broderick, many of them Latino, say the injunction is targeting innocent victims. They have outlined abuses by police, including charges that their families are photographed at picnics in the park, and that their children, while riding home on their bicycles, have been harassed by police.”

This will be the first major hearing since a letter from a Senior Investigator from the District Attorney’s Office disclosed that the District Attorney Jeff Reisig was dishonest with the court in the first go round of the Gang Injunction and its subsequent court challenges. He also admitted that he was pressured to sign an affidavit in support of the gang injunction this time round.

“As for the current and past Gang Injunction, when gathering intelligence, contacting active members and working with Detective Villanueva, I fully supported these efforts. However, after seeing this become your political benchmark, I have watched this injunction grow into something I did not want to be associated with or a part of, since I felt it had lost its original intent and purpose.”

He admits efforts to mislead the appellate court with regard to initial efforts at noticing a single individual who was not high up in the Broderick Boys organization.

“I also feel you misled the appellate court when you argued, as an officer of the court, that serving only one person during the initial injunction was intended to result in the word getting out to the rest of the Broderick Boys. You and I know that the opposite was true and Wolfington was not high up in the organization and was not expected to pass the word to the others.”

He also reveals reasons why they selected Mr. Wolfington to notice.

“I remember you telling me that you specifically selected Mr. Wolfington for being a less than “smart person”, you said he was “too stupid” to show up for court, he lived out of the area (in Sacramento) and he would likely not tell anyone.”

Rick Gore no longer agrees with the current gang injunction nor does he think it is needed. However, “an affidavit in support of the injunction under penalty of perjury. I did not want to sign it as written since it was not prepared by me and I thought portions of my affidavit were untrue.” He signed an affidavit of support for the second gang injunction that is currently in the process of being challenged.

He continues:

“I was called in by DDA Linden a few days later, and was told [Reisig] had ordered me to sign this injunction and I had no choice. Knowing I could be fired for not following this order, I signed it after changing some of the language.”

Investigator Gore’s acknowledgments call into question the veracity of the gang injunction.

Moreover, the District Attorney’s office has always maintained that they have full backing of the public in West Sacramento. Recently those claims at the very least have to be called into question as hundreds of residents have put up signs and walked precincts against the gang injunction. From the start they have claimed that the police department has used the gang injunction to target and harass members of the Latino Community, most of whom have little to do with the Broderick Street Boys street gang.

The District Attorney and other supports have pointed to a fall in crime as a result of the gang injunction. Those are difficult claims to maintain at best, however, it would be interesting to see all evidence laid bare for the public to see. Is there evidence that suggests that the gang injunction works beyond anecdotal rhetoric? Is there evidence that the public in the Broderick Street area–non-gang members–support the gang injunction? Let us see that evidence. I do not mean to suggest that we law enforce by public opinion, however, I have simply grown weary of certain claims made by the District Attorney’s office–I simply do not find them credible anymore.

—Doug Paul Davis reporting

Author

  • David Greenwald

    Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Categories:

Court Watch

72 comments

  1. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  2. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  3. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  4. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  5. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  6. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  7. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  8. Any and all claims made by Jeff Reisig should be viewed wearily, at the very least. His actions and assertions should be under public (and political/legal) scrutiny following the recent allegations against him. This includes Reisig’s reported omission of exculpatory evidence in a recent trial. Many of us wonder how often that has happened in Reisig’s career?
    We should not be surprised that Reisig’s ” gang ” injunction is not favored by many who know that they will be harassed, profiled, and targeted because of it. To think otherwise is nonsense.
    Glad that people are waking up. Davis did not vote Reisig in nor did West Sacramento. His vote was largely based in Woodland.
    It is only proper that there be a hearing held in Woodland with the public present. After hearing what is said and challenged, maybe next time Woodland will be more careful with their vote.

    Has that “official investigation” of Reisig’s misconduct began? Or will the public have to come to judgment on its own?

  9. Reisig probably never expected a full on challenge to the injunction and thought that it would just go through again although he named 23 individuals this time. 3 of the individuals have been dismissed, the public defender’s office is out, he didn’t pursue against the individuals that the ACLU represented on appeal. Of course that leaves 400 unnamed persons who they can later say are part of the alleged gang. The remaining named people were denied appointed counsel even though they would be subject to criminal prosecution for violations of some crazy lifetime prohibitions on liberty.

    Think about who could mount a defense to this public nuisance injunction without a lawyer? Of the 400 unnamed people, who would know to challenge this since they have not been noticed?

    If it weren’t for attorneys willing to do what they thought was the right thing to do pro bono, round 2 would have just gone throught and West Sacramento would have been declared a War Zone again although it isn’t.

    This is allegedly being done because the people of that area are asking for the injunction since he is “speaking” for the community!

    Is the DA listening to the community that will be affected? No! Why isn’t he? In fact, he is opposing their voices in court at the hearing!

    It is a sad day when one claims to be speaking for the citizens who will be affected who say “No” yet sends his minions out to do the dirty work. Particularly when it is becoming more evident that tactical decisions may have been made to deceive judicial officers.

    All of the things coming out is very disturbing….what is going on in Yolo County? Who is the watchdog of all of this? Will there be any accountability for what Rick Gore is alleging? Are there others in the DA’s office who will have the courage to come forward or like most public employees, just ride the wave to retirement if possible?

  10. Reisig probably never expected a full on challenge to the injunction and thought that it would just go through again although he named 23 individuals this time. 3 of the individuals have been dismissed, the public defender’s office is out, he didn’t pursue against the individuals that the ACLU represented on appeal. Of course that leaves 400 unnamed persons who they can later say are part of the alleged gang. The remaining named people were denied appointed counsel even though they would be subject to criminal prosecution for violations of some crazy lifetime prohibitions on liberty.

    Think about who could mount a defense to this public nuisance injunction without a lawyer? Of the 400 unnamed people, who would know to challenge this since they have not been noticed?

    If it weren’t for attorneys willing to do what they thought was the right thing to do pro bono, round 2 would have just gone throught and West Sacramento would have been declared a War Zone again although it isn’t.

    This is allegedly being done because the people of that area are asking for the injunction since he is “speaking” for the community!

    Is the DA listening to the community that will be affected? No! Why isn’t he? In fact, he is opposing their voices in court at the hearing!

    It is a sad day when one claims to be speaking for the citizens who will be affected who say “No” yet sends his minions out to do the dirty work. Particularly when it is becoming more evident that tactical decisions may have been made to deceive judicial officers.

    All of the things coming out is very disturbing….what is going on in Yolo County? Who is the watchdog of all of this? Will there be any accountability for what Rick Gore is alleging? Are there others in the DA’s office who will have the courage to come forward or like most public employees, just ride the wave to retirement if possible?

  11. Reisig probably never expected a full on challenge to the injunction and thought that it would just go through again although he named 23 individuals this time. 3 of the individuals have been dismissed, the public defender’s office is out, he didn’t pursue against the individuals that the ACLU represented on appeal. Of course that leaves 400 unnamed persons who they can later say are part of the alleged gang. The remaining named people were denied appointed counsel even though they would be subject to criminal prosecution for violations of some crazy lifetime prohibitions on liberty.

    Think about who could mount a defense to this public nuisance injunction without a lawyer? Of the 400 unnamed people, who would know to challenge this since they have not been noticed?

    If it weren’t for attorneys willing to do what they thought was the right thing to do pro bono, round 2 would have just gone throught and West Sacramento would have been declared a War Zone again although it isn’t.

    This is allegedly being done because the people of that area are asking for the injunction since he is “speaking” for the community!

    Is the DA listening to the community that will be affected? No! Why isn’t he? In fact, he is opposing their voices in court at the hearing!

    It is a sad day when one claims to be speaking for the citizens who will be affected who say “No” yet sends his minions out to do the dirty work. Particularly when it is becoming more evident that tactical decisions may have been made to deceive judicial officers.

    All of the things coming out is very disturbing….what is going on in Yolo County? Who is the watchdog of all of this? Will there be any accountability for what Rick Gore is alleging? Are there others in the DA’s office who will have the courage to come forward or like most public employees, just ride the wave to retirement if possible?

  12. Reisig probably never expected a full on challenge to the injunction and thought that it would just go through again although he named 23 individuals this time. 3 of the individuals have been dismissed, the public defender’s office is out, he didn’t pursue against the individuals that the ACLU represented on appeal. Of course that leaves 400 unnamed persons who they can later say are part of the alleged gang. The remaining named people were denied appointed counsel even though they would be subject to criminal prosecution for violations of some crazy lifetime prohibitions on liberty.

    Think about who could mount a defense to this public nuisance injunction without a lawyer? Of the 400 unnamed people, who would know to challenge this since they have not been noticed?

    If it weren’t for attorneys willing to do what they thought was the right thing to do pro bono, round 2 would have just gone throught and West Sacramento would have been declared a War Zone again although it isn’t.

    This is allegedly being done because the people of that area are asking for the injunction since he is “speaking” for the community!

    Is the DA listening to the community that will be affected? No! Why isn’t he? In fact, he is opposing their voices in court at the hearing!

    It is a sad day when one claims to be speaking for the citizens who will be affected who say “No” yet sends his minions out to do the dirty work. Particularly when it is becoming more evident that tactical decisions may have been made to deceive judicial officers.

    All of the things coming out is very disturbing….what is going on in Yolo County? Who is the watchdog of all of this? Will there be any accountability for what Rick Gore is alleging? Are there others in the DA’s office who will have the courage to come forward or like most public employees, just ride the wave to retirement if possible?

  13. Several DA officers told Reisig to dismiss several cases because of misconduct or/ and false information but he told them no and now several cases are in trail and many more to face trail. How far will he go to protect his career?

  14. Several DA officers told Reisig to dismiss several cases because of misconduct or/ and false information but he told them no and now several cases are in trail and many more to face trail. How far will he go to protect his career?

  15. Several DA officers told Reisig to dismiss several cases because of misconduct or/ and false information but he told them no and now several cases are in trail and many more to face trail. How far will he go to protect his career?

  16. Several DA officers told Reisig to dismiss several cases because of misconduct or/ and false information but he told them no and now several cases are in trail and many more to face trail. How far will he go to protect his career?

  17. Now we know why Reisig’s conviction rate is 90%. I pray that all parties involved with his misconduct pays for all the lives that has been destroyed.

  18. Now we know why Reisig’s conviction rate is 90%. I pray that all parties involved with his misconduct pays for all the lives that has been destroyed.

  19. Now we know why Reisig’s conviction rate is 90%. I pray that all parties involved with his misconduct pays for all the lives that has been destroyed.

  20. Now we know why Reisig’s conviction rate is 90%. I pray that all parties involved with his misconduct pays for all the lives that has been destroyed.

  21. Reisig is not the only one in office corrupted or/and doing misconduct, just sit in some trails to hear and see what really goes on in court, you will be very surprise

  22. Reisig is not the only one in office corrupted or/and doing misconduct, just sit in some trails to hear and see what really goes on in court, you will be very surprise

  23. Reisig is not the only one in office corrupted or/and doing misconduct, just sit in some trails to hear and see what really goes on in court, you will be very surprise

  24. Reisig is not the only one in office corrupted or/and doing misconduct, just sit in some trails to hear and see what really goes on in court, you will be very surprise

  25. I agree. Reisig is not the only corrupt person at the DA’s Office. However, he is the District Attorney. Therefore, he is accountability for the actions of his employees as well as himself.
    I, too, challenge the public to sit in on cases to gain a greater understanding of Yolo County’s ” process.” Also, when able attend meetings and hearings that address complaints against the office, its practices, and politics. Mondays hearing is a wonderful opportunity. When the DA’s Office sees that people are watching and questioning it, things will change before the next election. Reisig evidently thinks that he is ” above the law.” He has been able to get away with a lot before Gore’s allegations.
    The DA’s Office appears to have several pompous, culturally challenged, insensitive people who feel that a law degree entitles them to abuse. This characterization does not apply to all, but one DA and one or more DDA’s abusing a position of power is one too many.
    The DA’s Office has ruined and interrupted many lives just so that a DA can claim an excellent record. What happened to justice?

  26. I agree. Reisig is not the only corrupt person at the DA’s Office. However, he is the District Attorney. Therefore, he is accountability for the actions of his employees as well as himself.
    I, too, challenge the public to sit in on cases to gain a greater understanding of Yolo County’s ” process.” Also, when able attend meetings and hearings that address complaints against the office, its practices, and politics. Mondays hearing is a wonderful opportunity. When the DA’s Office sees that people are watching and questioning it, things will change before the next election. Reisig evidently thinks that he is ” above the law.” He has been able to get away with a lot before Gore’s allegations.
    The DA’s Office appears to have several pompous, culturally challenged, insensitive people who feel that a law degree entitles them to abuse. This characterization does not apply to all, but one DA and one or more DDA’s abusing a position of power is one too many.
    The DA’s Office has ruined and interrupted many lives just so that a DA can claim an excellent record. What happened to justice?

  27. I agree. Reisig is not the only corrupt person at the DA’s Office. However, he is the District Attorney. Therefore, he is accountability for the actions of his employees as well as himself.
    I, too, challenge the public to sit in on cases to gain a greater understanding of Yolo County’s ” process.” Also, when able attend meetings and hearings that address complaints against the office, its practices, and politics. Mondays hearing is a wonderful opportunity. When the DA’s Office sees that people are watching and questioning it, things will change before the next election. Reisig evidently thinks that he is ” above the law.” He has been able to get away with a lot before Gore’s allegations.
    The DA’s Office appears to have several pompous, culturally challenged, insensitive people who feel that a law degree entitles them to abuse. This characterization does not apply to all, but one DA and one or more DDA’s abusing a position of power is one too many.
    The DA’s Office has ruined and interrupted many lives just so that a DA can claim an excellent record. What happened to justice?

  28. I agree. Reisig is not the only corrupt person at the DA’s Office. However, he is the District Attorney. Therefore, he is accountability for the actions of his employees as well as himself.
    I, too, challenge the public to sit in on cases to gain a greater understanding of Yolo County’s ” process.” Also, when able attend meetings and hearings that address complaints against the office, its practices, and politics. Mondays hearing is a wonderful opportunity. When the DA’s Office sees that people are watching and questioning it, things will change before the next election. Reisig evidently thinks that he is ” above the law.” He has been able to get away with a lot before Gore’s allegations.
    The DA’s Office appears to have several pompous, culturally challenged, insensitive people who feel that a law degree entitles them to abuse. This characterization does not apply to all, but one DA and one or more DDA’s abusing a position of power is one too many.
    The DA’s Office has ruined and interrupted many lives just so that a DA can claim an excellent record. What happened to justice?

  29. Prepare to see Mr. Reisig get flambeyed (sp?) and his silent partner, Jonathan Raven step in to “save the day”. Mr. Raven might even create a “consultant” position for Mr. Reisig like Reisig did for him (at taxpayer expense of course). However icky, that would at least constitute a minor improvement, in that you’ll get a somewhat feckless career politician replacing a bona fide bully and liar.

  30. Prepare to see Mr. Reisig get flambeyed (sp?) and his silent partner, Jonathan Raven step in to “save the day”. Mr. Raven might even create a “consultant” position for Mr. Reisig like Reisig did for him (at taxpayer expense of course). However icky, that would at least constitute a minor improvement, in that you’ll get a somewhat feckless career politician replacing a bona fide bully and liar.

  31. Prepare to see Mr. Reisig get flambeyed (sp?) and his silent partner, Jonathan Raven step in to “save the day”. Mr. Raven might even create a “consultant” position for Mr. Reisig like Reisig did for him (at taxpayer expense of course). However icky, that would at least constitute a minor improvement, in that you’ll get a somewhat feckless career politician replacing a bona fide bully and liar.