Friday, Oct 4

I've received objections to my reporting that Angel did not plead guilty. As such, I will be get copies of relevant documents and post them here - but not today.

My criticism of the Herald was too harsh. Their reporting was not deliberately false. I'll restate it as overly general and misleading.

An Alford Plea, which is what she pled, is a legally recognized statement that needs explaining. Why is it important? Because the city accepted it rather than a regular guilty plea and that goes to the weakness of the city's case against Angel Drayton.

Wednesday, Oct 2

As expected, the Herald got it wrong. Their story says Angel pled guilty and that it is just her attorney who says she did not plead guilty. But - her attorney faxed the Herald reporter the actual agreement yesterday afternoon, so the reporter has no excuse for mis-reporting. It is deliberate false reporting - to make Angel look worse and the city look exonerated. Just as expected and predicted below last evening. There was no Herald reporter at court. It was reporting by phone - 2nd hand, inexpensive and convenient - but not accurate.

KGMI is also falsely reporting guilt this morning. They also report the city dropped "nine animal abuse charges". Gentle reader, there never were any abuse charges. None.

The difference is huge in that the city accepted less than a guilty plea. The headline could accurately state "City accepts not-guilty plea". The city was getting into an awkward spot and wanted out. Note she got a dog back. Why? Because she would not sign unless she did. Yesterday, during plea bargaining, she held the good cards. This web site will try and document some of the city's problems in future posts. For now, my assessment of yesterday is below.

Tuesday, Oct 1

Angel Drayton made an Alford Plea to two counts of a dirty yard today and received stern punishment from judge Debra Lev. The judge seemed reluctant to let the black woman off, saying "I'm not convinced she will be the poster child for dog ownership". Indeed, Lev placed a long list on conditions on Angel, which would do justice to a crime of violence - assault with a deadly weapon or gross vandalism of city property. Not a dirty yard.

Angel accepted the plea after threats from city prosecutor Lustick of much more severe punishment should she refuse him and Judge Lev preside over her trial. He threatened to have a two year ban on pet ownership follow her no matter where she might move to. Jail was what Angel most feared and Lustick played the card. He only softened the plea terms in the last 24 hours. We think he became concerned about possible media attention and the presence of more citizens at the hearing.

Angel got one dog back. She must subject herself to city inspection every 2 weeks for several months. She cannot have other dogs. She was sentenced to 90 days in jail, suspended. She was fined $2,000 with $1,500 suspended. She is on probation and must pay a monthly fee to the county for that "service". Judge Lev appointed a 'Guardian Ad Litem" for the dog - yes, the judge said that with a straight face. It was hard not to smirk.

Gentle reader, there was no charge of dog neglect. No charge of viscous dog. Nor of biting. Nor of the dogs running loose in the neighborhood. No charge of mistreatment of the dogs. The charges were for a dirty and smelly yard. The judge and the city prosecutor went to extremes to punish this innocent black woman and teach her a lesson about Bellingham. White folk needn't worry about their yards. Nor their freedom from reckless prosecution and biased judges.

The court tried hard to humiliate her. She held her head up. Lustick wanted even more blood, but Joan Hoisington, his boss, was in court to make sure the plea bargain went through as agreed. Joe Pemberton, Angel's attorney, normally handles civil cases but agreed to represent Angel when all the criminal attorney's in town closed their doors to this black woman targeted by the city court machine.

The insidious partnership of Judge Debra Lev and city prosecutor Jeff Lustick remains in place - ready to railroad the next person the police drag into their court. Last year it was the Pit 33 - the young innocent protestors from the Mason building site. Who is next?

I expect the Herald to get the story factually wrong. They had no reporter there, and depended on phone calls again. The KGMI reporter spent a long time in Lustick's office. I watched them go down the hall laughing and yucking. Then later KGMI asked Joe one short trap question. That was it. Don't expect any fair reporting from them.

What's an Alford Plea? She did not admit guilt. She wrote "I deny any wrong doing but enter a plea of guilty to avoid risk of trial." The US Supreme Court has legalized Alford Pleas. Angel knew Lev would make sure she was convicted and there would be no fair trial. She took her only way out. She did not lose.

In this court case, Bellingham lost.

Wednesday, Sep 25

Lets say you are served with an abatement order from the city to clean up something. Maybe it is an unfinished building project that the neighbors have complained about. Maybe it is too many old cars in the front yard. Maybe it is complaints of dog feces in your yard.

Ok - the order gives you 5 days to get rid of the problem. You didn't really know you were violating any law. Every dog owner has some feces in their yard. So you clean it up. The inspecting police officer comes by a couple days later and writes up a clean inspection. You complied.

Well, for you and every case in Bellingham history, that is the end of it. You obey an abatement order and you are not cited. That is the whole point of abatement orders. To give you a chance to correct the problem.

But not for Angel Drayton. The day Officer Burkhart inspected and gave her yard a clean bill of health, city prosecutor Lustick filed four criminal charges of dirty yard against Angel. Angel is a black woman, who made the mistake of moving to white Bellingham three years ago.

Tuesday in court, Lustick successfully convinced Judge Debra Lev that the law works that way. He turned the law on its head - and Judge Lev went along with it. Case law? None cited. Did the judge ask for case law? Nope. Angel's attorney, Joe Pemberton, had asked for dismissal on the basis that the charges came after Angel obeyed the abatement order. Judge Lev ruled she goes to trial.

Now, if you are a white guy with a gawd awful yard or building, don't worry about being cited for criminal acts. Officer Burkhart knows of no other case in her career where this has happened - and she has many years experience. You can get extensions to abatement orders - not criminal charges.

This is just another piece of evidence for my accusation that the city prosecutor Lustick is motivated by racism in his prosecution of Angel Drayton. He is using the law in twisted ways that he would never use on white persons. The case is about a dirty yard. He is making a federal case of it.

Hey, you attorneys reading this. You know this is weird. Why not offer some help to Joe Pemberton on this case.

No Herald reporter there. Just a couple supporters for Angel. Just a railroad job to drive this black woman out of Bellingham. Lustick smirked and tossed out insulting remarks the judge somehow never heard - although we in the audience did. A sad sight.

In closing, can't help but remind you of the Flame Tavern and the rusty skelton in Fairhaven. They got extensions of extensions on their abatement orders. And no criminal charges. Of course not. Lustick is targeting Angel because she is black. Yes, gentle reader, even in Bellingham. Someone told me that if I wrote about pet abuse I'd get more concern from Bellinghamites. Are we a racist community?

Monday, Aug 19

I've posted the press release from the Whatcom Humane Society that was faxed to local media on August 12. You might compare it with the report from C. Cooper that was posted over the weekend (see below for more info).

This fax is one example of the efforts by city prosecutor and police to smear Angel and justify their persecution of her. The society would not have sent the fax without their permission. The prosecutor has reportedly tried to make a deal with Angel which would have allowed him to drop the charges. His case is very weak.

The police gave their file on Angel Drayton to a member of the Whatcom Human Rights Task Force and told them to read it before they support Angel in public. This raises the question of the legality of this action, but without any agency to enforce laws against this action the police can do what they want.

Intimidation of the public by police? Yes. That is exactly what it is. The police have no business going around visiting people and warning them against supporting people who are charged with a crime.

The police also suggested the Task Force take the link to NWCitizen off their web site if they wanted good relations with the police in the future.

By the way, you can read the Task Force mission statement on their web site. It is one of many local links along the left column of this page.

Sunday, Aug 18

And of course still not a word since June on the Angel Drayton criminal prosecution - and possible jail time for her. When she was at the hospital giving birth, she was not keeping her dog kennel clean enough. Our city attorney is spending most of his time on it. The police are obsessed with it, confronting some possible supporters and arresting and harassing her friends. She is black. The police have actually asked how a black woman can afford such a nice house. The grapevine says the prosecutor thinks she is the front for drug dealers from Tacoma. Must be. How could a single black woman just move to town and buy a nice house like that? Racist prosecution? How dare the NWCitizen use that word.

But to the Herald there is no local news today. None.