San Diego 6 has a good summary of why the sentences for manslaughter were handed out this way, and it shows how Esteban was influenced by his friends. This isn’t too surprising when you look at the photos that Esteban Nuñez had published on his myspace account showing him and his friends drinking, partying, posing like thugs, etc.:

Esteban Nunez of Sacramento pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter and two counts of assault with a deadly weapon for the Oct. 4, 2008, confrontation that took the life of Luis Santos — also known as Luis Dos Santos.

Ryan Jett, 24, of Sacramento, also pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter and assault for instigating the incident, in which two of Santos’ friends were also stabbed and another friend suffered an eye injury.

Two others — Leshanor Thomas, 21, and 20-year-old Rafael Garcia — pleaded guilty to lesser charges and will be sentenced next Friday.

“Had they not all acted together, Luis would still be alive,” Deputy District Attorney Jill DiCarlo said.

Nunez was next to Jett the entire time to “aid and abet” the assault, the prosecutor said.

“He was not a passive participant — he did not play a minor role,” DiCarlo said. “He took on a tough guy, dominating role.”

Hopefully, the family of Luis Dos Santos finds peace and Esteban Nuñez serves out his sentence and avoids this kind of violence in the future. And I hope that politicians such as Mayor Villaraigosa and Kevin de Leon, who were quick to defend the younger Nuñez, think twice about publicly offering support to their colleagues’ children who engage in this kind of behavior. In rushing to defend Esteban Nuñez, these elected officials created an impression that they support deviant behavior.

This is from the AP:

For Justice Sotomayor, deciding to make suspects speak to have the right to remain silent was a step too far. Sotomayor, the court’s newest member, wrote a strongly worded dissent for the court’s liberals, saying the majority’s decision “turns Miranda upside down.”

“Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent – which counter-intuitively requires them to speak,” she said. “At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so. Those results, in my view, find no basis in Miranda or our subsequent cases and are inconsistent with the fair-trial principles on which those precedents are grounded.”

She was joined in her dissent by Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

My immediate reaction to the ruling was that it will be highly consequential to suspects unaware of their inalienable rights before the law; and that the decision is particularly consequential to suspects who don’t speak ‘American’ or understand our American language.

“Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent…”

There is nothing inherently unambiguous about my father’s accent when he speaks ‘American’. He is an American citizen, yet his accent remains soaked in phonetics built a world away in a Chilean slum several lifetimes ago. Were he a suspect, he’d need only speak to risk being conveniently misunderstood confessing.

But the Supreme Court has ruled. In my opinion, the ruling is again highly misguided. Nevertheless, I wonder about the reason(s) Sotomayor dissented. Could it be that Sotomayor’s dissent was a watchdog move, our wise Latina looking out for 2009s most legally-mangled American demographic? Or was it just good old-fashioned sound jurisprudence?

Regrettably, our wise Latina was overruled by her Supreme Court colleagues. That said, Mr. James Duane is a professor at Regent Law School and a former defense attorney. Here Professor Duane cites Justice Robert Jackson saying, “Any lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances.”

Then Duane backtracks, excepting two phrases you can say to a cop, but only these two phrases and never any other:

1. “I do not consent to any searches.”
2. “I have nothing to say.”

Legally, anything else you say cannot help you and absolutely can be used against you in a court of law, according to Professor Duane. Since watching Duane’s lecture for the first time two years ago, the only two phrases I’ve said to cops are the above. The last time, a cop once went to frisk me in front of my own home and I unambiguously told him, “I do not consent to any searches.” He stopped and said, “Why not? What do you have on you? Drugs? Guns? A knife?…”

“I have nothing to say.” At all. Period. Ever. The freedom of speech is as American as the right to remain silent.

So here’s the latest:

Ten News in San Diego is reporting that jury selection is being pushed out until Tuesday. And here is a repeat of what is to be decided before the jury:

“Ryan Jett, 24, and Esteban Nunez, 21, are charged with murder, assault, vandalism, conspiracy to commit an assault and conspiracy to destroy evidence in the death of 22-year-old Luis Santos.

If convicted, both face 25 years to life behind bars.

Two co-defendants, 20-year-old Rafael Garcia and 21-year-old Leshanor Thomas, pleaded guilty to lesser charges.”

A few weeks ago, the LA Weekly reported that a hearing was held where the judge ruled that rap lyrics written by Esteban Nuñez could not be brought before a jury, but a text message that Nuñez sent to his co-defendant Rafael Garcia shortly after the killing can be presented to the jury. The message read, “Gangsta rap made us do it.”

Now many of us have heard of the twinkie defense used by Dan White in another high profile California murder case, but I haven’t heard of the ‘gangsta rap’ defense, have you?

It’s also worth listening to this report by KNX 1070.

UPDATED 5/5/2010: Esteban Nuñez and his co-defendant Ryan Jett have pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in the stabbing death of Luis Santos. Sentencing is scheduled for June 25, and the judge has indicated that he plans to send both young men to prison but may not impose the maximum 16 year sentence. In pleading guilty, both men will now have two strikes. I have a sneaky suspicion that Fabian Nuñez will get on some sort of prison reform kick or will attempt to revise the three strikes law, which I actually think is worth revisiting for drug offenders, not necessarily murderers. I always thought that Esteban had projected an entitlement attitude based upon how he presented himself online and in the remarks he made that became evidence.

Finally, if you want to read about the actual court room drama from today. The LA Weekly has a nice, brief write up of the emotions and mood projected by the Nuñez family.

“Here’s why the political elite in California are watching this tragic murder case involving alleged killers who come from private schools and lives of power and privilege:

The case has elicited the involvement of California’s Democratic Party political stars, from Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to County Federation of Labor chief Maria Elena Durazo — all rallying around the accused while doing nothing to support the family of the widely-loved dead young man, who went, simply, by the name Lu.”

I think that Villaraigosa, Durazo, Romero, and De Leon should have said nothing publicly about Fabian Nuñez’s kid, Esteban and his trials and tribulations, especially without expressing sympathy for the real victim in this case, a deceased young man, Lu Santos. Politically a “no comment on this pending case” would probably have served all of these leaders better than expressing sympathy for Fabian Nuñez and his child, who is out on bail, in my view.

I think that whether Fabian Nuñez makes a run for the state treasurer in four years will largely depend how the murder trial that his son is involved in turns out. The trial of Esteban Nuñez is scheduled for April of this year after being rescheduled. If you all remember, the younger Nuñez displayed a very interesting myspace page that has since been taken down. I’m still bothered when I look at the pictures of young Esteban Nuñez. What does this say about his father and his agenda in the public sphere? Tell us what you think. Should Fabian Nuñez return to public life or should he stay in the private sector? I personally think that he shouldn’t even be in lobbying because he represents part of what many people loathe, the revolving door where electeds become lobbyists and continue to feed at the public trough. And Nuñez is certainly young and resourceful enough to reinvent himself.

The LA Times reports:

“Rafael Garcia, a college student in Northern California, pleaded guilty to felony conspiracy to destroy evidence, including a bloody shirt. In exchange, prosecutors dropped a murder charge against him in the Oct. 4 death of Luis Santos.

As part of a plea bargain, Garcia agreed to testify against three co-defendants: Ryan Jett, Esteban Nuñez and Leshanor Thomas.”

In other Fabian Nuñez related news, his consulting firm is working a new gig for Mayor Villaraigosa and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

We have already documented how some Latino political figures such as Mayor Villaraigosa, Assemblyman Kevin De Leon, State Senator Gloria Romero, and LA County Federation of Labor Head Maria Elena Durazo have publicly expressed support for Esteban Nuñez, the son of the former Assembly Speaker, who is facing trial for murder and his family. Even Villaraigosa’s ex-wife, Corina chimed in expressing, “I know that Esteban is in school and working toward a bachelor’s degree” according to the LA Weekly piece.

I encourage you to read this well researched and thoughtful piece. Writer Christine Pelisek details the players in this case in a way that I would have liked to do if I had more time and resources to devote to this. One interesting glimpse into the Nuñez family is how Pelisek notes, Esteban’s mother, Maria Robles, a nurse and non-profit executive, smoking outside of the courtroom with her grown children. I was under the impression that she and Fabian had three children (pictured here), Esteban, a teen girl, and the younger boy, but regardless, smoking is a dirty habit for someone in a profession dedicated to health and wellness.

• Congresswoman Linda Sanchez and her new husband Jim Sullivan welcome new baby Joaquin Sanchez Sullivan.
• A blog post worth reading: The Luis Ramirez Murder: A Logical Step in the Process of Establishing a Subhuman Class

Feel free to give us some ideas for upcoming blog posts.

Yesterday, the AP reported this:

“POTTSVILLE, Pa. (AP) — An all-white jury on Friday acquitted two Pennsylvania teenagers of all serious charges against them stemming from the fatal beating of an illegal Mexican immigrant last summer.

Brandon Piekarsky, 17, was acquitted of third-degree murder and ethnic intimidation, while Derrick Donchak, 19, was acquitted of aggravated assault and ethnic intimidation. Both were convicted of simple assault.”

And on Friday, after the jury verdict came in, MALDEF (note the corporate sponsor under the signage) released the following press release:

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION

May 1, 2009

JUSTICE NOT SERVED:  PENNSYLVANIA HATE CRIME ASSAILANTS FOUND NOT
GUILTY

Latino hate crime trial ends with ‘not guilty’ verdict

POTTSVILLE, PA –  A jury in Schuylkill County found the two
defendants, Brandon Piekarsky and Derrick Donchak, accused of beating
25-year-old Luis Ramirez to death, not guilty.

“Tonight there is no justice in Shenandoah, Pennsylvania.  The jury’s
conclusion is an outrage.  Luis Ramirez was brutally murdered.
Witnesses testified that it was racially motivated as a result of hate
and intolerance.  In the week when Congress passed the Hate Crimes
Act, this verdict underscores the importance of the passage of this
Act.  It is time for the Department of Justice to step in and bring
justice to the Ramirez family and send a strong message that violence
targeting immigrants will not be tolerated and will be prosecuted to
the full extent of the law,” stated Henry Solano, MALDEF interim
president and general counsel.

In July 2008, Ramirez lost his life after he was knocked unconscious
and kicked in the head by a group of Shenandoah teenagers who yelled
racial epithets before and during the brutal beating. Witnesses
overheard anti-Mexican and ethnic epithets shouted by his
assailants.   At trial one of the witnesses testified that one of
Ramirez’s friends tried to stop the beating but one of the assailants
said, “Tell your Mexican friends to get out of town, or you’ll be
laying next to him.”   Ramirez leaves behind his fiancée and their two
young children.

Brandon Piekarsky was charged with third-degree murder and Derrick
Donchak was charged with aggravated assault. Both were charged with
ethnic intimidation.

“Luis’s death reflects a steady increase of hate crimes targeting
Latinos. Since 2002, the FBI has documented a 40 percent increase in
hate crimes committed against Latinos,” said Gladys Limón, MALDEF
staff attorney.  “This drastic rise of hate crimes against Latinos
must be addressed by the new Administration and Congress.”

Earlier this week, the U.S. House of Representatives took a historic
step forward and passed H.R. 1913, “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crime
Prevention Act” by a vote of 249 to 175.  The bill strengthens
existing federal hate crime laws by authorizing the Department of
Justice to assist local authorities in investigating and prosecuting
certain bias-motivated crimes.  MALDEF urges the Senate to act quickly
and pass the bill.

MALDEF will continue to work with the Ramirez family and the U.S.
Department of Justice to ensure that the actions of the defendants and
the death of Luis Ramirez is fully investigate as a hate crime.

~~~

Now as I have read about this case, the victim certainly wasn’t free of his own issues. It was revealed that he had an underage girlfriend in addition to the fiancee Crystal Dillman, and there were allegations of drug use on his end. However, I still cannot believe that the perpetrators were convicted of simple assault and nothing more. I think that this won’t do anything to ease the already high tensions in this small town. I do agree with MALDEF that justice was not served, but what do you think? I encourage you to share your thoughts in this blog post.

If you want to learn more about this trial, you can read a live blog from The Republican Herald. My colleague Megan, who works for The Republican Herald, was kind enough to send me the link.

Photo Credit: MALDEF Los Angeles Offices lobby sign, Wendy Carrillo