Jamiel Shaw. Those are fighting words these days. In Los Angeles, for sure.
In fact, I continue to get e-mails at my office address,
schwada@fox11.com, from folks who believe, fervently believe, young Shaw - a star high school footballer killed outside his house, allegedly by a self-avowed member of 18th St gang - was no angel. That he was, in fact, a gangbanger.
Apparently some believe if Shaw's bona fides as an innocent victim are besmirched it will take the steam out of the Shaw family's high-profile campaign against illegal alien gangmembers. The Shaw's crusade has been fueled by their belief that their son would be alive today if the authorities had done their job and deported his alleged shooter, 19-year-old Pedro Espinoza, who is an illegal alien.
The Shaw's have called on the LAPD to amend Special Order 40, the controversial measure that bars the LAPD from enforcing federal immigration laws. (Their efforts have gotten a lot of play on conservative talk-radio shows but gained little traction elsewhere, including the LA City Council, where they appear to be getting some support - perhaps only lip-service? - from Councilman Dennis Zine. This at a time when the
New York Times reports on a trend of police agencies and local governments, in other parts of the U.S., hammering away at the illegal alien situation).
Authorities say not only is Espinoza in the U.S. illegally but also that he is a self-avowed member of the 18th Street gang. Records show Espinoza was in and out of youth authority detention facilities and county
jail for several years prior to Shaw's murder. In fact, Espinoza had just
been released from county jail 28 hours prior to Shaw's murder after
serving time for an assault-related incident in a Culver City park.
So, does it detract from the Shaw's crusade against Special Order 40, against illegal alien gang members, if their son were himself a gangmember? No question much of the outpouring of sympathy for the Shaw's upon their son's murder was based on the belief young Shaw was an upstanding kid, with a future.
But even
if we granted Shaw was actually a below-the-radar gangmember (the LAPD has never said they had any record of him being a gangster) would it really diminish the Shaw's argument that
if the authorities had done their job, their son would be alive today, that on March 2, Espinoza would have been in a deportation tank awaiting a trip back to Mexico, instead of gunning down Shaw less than 100 steps from his home?
Frankly, my view is that
from a subjective standpoint, it probably does diminish Shaw's attractiveness as a "martyr" in the anti-illegal immigrant cause if he were a gangbanger.
On the other hand,
logically, it makes no difference. The facts still remain: that Espinoza - if we are to believe the authorities - was here illegally, had been in and out of lockups for years and probably should have been collared by immigration authorities and deported as soon as he walked out of county jail on March 1.
We are still waiting to hear from LAPD chief Wm. Bratton about his promised report to clarify Special Order 40. It is a political hot-potato.
Here is the link to the website that argues Shaw was a gangbanger. It includes a photo that purports to show Shaw with a red bandana across his face, flashing a gang sign. Alex Alonso, a well-known local gang expert and a man who I have several times relied on to add his valuable insights to my own stories about gangs, is the source of much of the "debate" about Shaw's gang ties.
Click here to read the New York Times article I referenced about the local fight against illegal immigration that ran earlier this week.Click here to read my first blog posting on the Shaw murder.Click here to read my second blog posting on the Shaw murder.
