Taped interviews recently filmed and released by Youth CineMedia — a nonprofit that works with at-risk youth by getting them off the streets and into the production room — depict individuals who say they were wrongfully named in the city’s gang injunction announced last week. The injunction seeks to limit the movement and activity of 30 men and women who law enforcement feels are at the root of Santa Barbara’s gang activity.
While The Independent has not been able to verify claims made in Youth CineMedia’s tapings, we nevertheless feel the footage warrants attention. Below you’ll find one of the interviews as well as a copy of the injunction itself.


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
Sleepy Loca?
Scooter (anonymous profile)
April 12, 2011 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That's her. Maybe she shouldn't have made all them gangsta raps.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
April 12, 2011 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Either the video is very inaccurate, or this injunction is the start of a Police State where government can arbitrarily do whatever they want with no consequences.
Would somebody who knows what's going on step up to the plate and address this?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 12, 2011 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you can't tell a gangpunk miscreant from a not-gangpunk miscreant, you're not paying attention. Just follow the trail of blood and ink.
Draxor (anonymous profile)
April 13, 2011 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There are so many times when kids sign their lives away, not knowing the ramifications that may raise their ugly heads later.
If you can put someone ON a list, you can certainly take them OFF the list and this girl needs to have her name taken off immediately.
There are so many things we are doing wrong in this culture, and in Santa Barbara, that help keep the gangs going strong:
1) teens don't have many hand-on learning opportunities in school...shop, auto mechanics, etc.; anything to keep their minds, and hands busy.
2) teens don't have a place, unless they are on a sports team, to go workout, be part of a healthy team, learn team skills, cooperation, healthy competition.
3) teens aren't being taught things that are relevant in their lives, like money, investing, relationships, parenting, etc.
You get the picture...now let's paint a different one, beginning with this young woman who is obviously got her life on track. Let's not derail her now.
elisdinsb (anonymous profile)
April 13, 2011 at 2:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
so how do the teens in sb who are not in gangs do it elisdinsb.
as far as gangbangers are concerned they would rather skip school, drink, smoke, party, fight, etc...than do any of the things you talk about...because those choices you mention have existed here for years.
according to keyt, all they have to do to get off the list is tell the police they denounce the gang lifestyle. as of last night none of them have. they are derailing themselves. lets not blame the law abiding people.
lawdy (anonymous profile)
April 13, 2011 at 5:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If anybody believes the police unfairly targeted this girl and slandered her in any way watch the following videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iPfUT...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP7hB5...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUPOS-...
I think she did it to herself, and is lucky a gang injunction is all she is getting instead of a deportation.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
April 13, 2011 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Take a look at our immigration policy: Both political parties support the endless importation of low-skilled people who are kept that way by being lied to by being told that they don't need to learn the language/assimilate. More people come in, wages are suppressed, we get more overcrowded, supply and demand drives up prices, and people wonder why the gang problem is spiraling out of control?
We can talk all about A: Injunctions; B: Building more prisons/"getting tough on crime"; or C: More after school programs for our "at-risk" youth, but until this uncomfortable fact is confronted, the situation and tensions will only get worse.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 14, 2011 at 4:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You are in the wrong state for that kind of talk Bill.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
April 14, 2011 at 5:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm in a state of discontent.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 15, 2011 at 5:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I hear that, but you are also making too much sense, and we can't have any of that. What you have to do is come up with the most outrageous statements and ideas in order to make any sense in todays world.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
April 15, 2011 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lawdy says gangmembers only want to " skip school, drink, smoke, party, fight, "
Newsflash: So do many if not most students, sans* the fighting
* French for without.
EZK (anonymous profile)
April 16, 2011 at 12:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ezk..most students don't stab each other, or beat passerbys to death.
most students dont travel in packs to different parts of town looking for other students affiliated with different packs to engage in stabbings and shootings.
most students go to school to get an education, and possibly move on to higher education.
thats what most students do ezk...sans doute.
lawdy (anonymous profile)
April 16, 2011 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
you have to pay a price for what u did whether it was recently or a long time ago. how did she not expect her name to be on the injunction? i am not a gangster and even i know who she is. i just feel bad for her daughter.
lc2807 (anonymous profile)
April 22, 2011 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank God this woman procreated so that the California Prison Guards will have another generation to look after. Keep up the good work Indy!
Actually, I predict that her child will either be: President of a major corporation; or a piece of crap. Tough call...
Those of us that work hard and are not criminals need to see the jaded presentation of stories about lowlifes now and again...
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 6:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why is she on the gang injunction? She has a job in medical records and a family, hardly qualifies as gang injunction criteria.
sbs124 (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
but just in case some of the readership doesn't know:
sbs124: "Why is she on the gang injunction? She has a job in medical records and a family, hardly qualifies as gang injunction criteria."
Here's the criteria:
1) The named injuctee has to be over 18 yrs. of age.
2) Tenure in a known criminal street gang must be proven.
3) A criminal history during said tenure must be proven.
4) Said criminal activity must be linked to gang activity.
5) Race. ethnicity or color do not matter.
By the way, a lot of homies/cholas have jobs & have been picked up by the popo @ their places of work. So much for them needing jobs.
As for those readers still stuck on the "Constitutionality" of the Gang Injunction, where's the "un-Constitunionality"? :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Does a graffiti charge make you the worse of the worse in SB? I would just assume a gang injunction would target violent criminals who put people at risk of harm. I just don't see that here. Is it constitutional to tell people what they can't and can do and when and where if they don't pose a threat to anyone? What would be the point of putting this mother on the gang injunction, what is the big change that will occur or is just some PR stunt? I just don't see what the city thinks it will gain.
sbs124 (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
sbs124: "Is it constitutional to tell people what they can't and can do and when and where if they don't pose a threat to anyone?"
Actually, it is if said person(s) pose(s) a threat due to their behavior(s) & participate in illegal activity usch as belonging to a criminakl street gang.
sbs124: "What would be the point of putting this mother on the gang injunction, what is the big change that will occur or is just some PR stunt?"
The point would be to send a message that she's being watched & if she changes (straightens out), becomes productive & stays out of gangs she will be removed from the injunction & renounce the thug life.
The opposite is to stay in the thug life, risk prison, losing her kid & possibly losing her life.
The thug life comes w/ dues, if you wanna play, you gotta pay, or as homies like to say: "Laugh now, cry later."
As for PR stunt, the only PR stunt I see on these pages is homies w/ the help of Youth CineMedia trying to defend their choice(s) to be thugs.
You can have all the high tech media gear in the world, but if you're a thug it's still gonna show :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hank-You've got to stop dazzling these people with logic. Unless you focus on emotion they don't want to listen.
BC-You've got to stop typifying the real reasons behind this escalating fiasco. Unless the rest of the world agrees that the only causational factor is racism they don't want to hear it.
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The thing "progressives" & bleedinghearts fail to realize is that if she stays out of trouble her placement in the injunction gets removed. That is how it is designed, 'forcible rehab" if you will.
Nobody wants to derail her of she's on the right track in life. The ONLY thing that can derail her is her old homegirls & if she chooses to hang w/ them, well, we all know what's next.
All the authorities are asking her to do is very simple: Prove them wrong by staying away from problem/toxic people, follow the laws & stay on track. Once she can do that, all will be fine, otherwise... :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
November 21, 2011 at 4:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)