LOS ANGELES, Calif. – The ACLU of Southern California is troubled by the Orange County District Attorney’s recent determination not to criminally charge an Anaheim police officer who tragically shot and killed Julian Alexander, an innocent 20-year-old resident, during a pursuit.

“We are very concerned that this questionable officer shooting has not gotten the full and transparent scrutiny that the Alexander family and the public deserve,” said Hector Villagra, director of the ACLU/SC’s Orange County office. “There has been no explanation as to why the fatal shooting of a man in front of his own home warrants not a single criminal charge.”

“We will closely monitor the continuing law-enforcement investigation into this disturbing and tragic shooting,” said Belinda Escobosa Helzer, staff attorney with the ACLU/SC. “We want to make sure the details of the shooting and investigation are exposed to the light of day, so the public can judge for itself.”

On Oct. 28, an unnamed Anaheim officer shot Julian Alexander shortly after the newlywed had come outside his home to investigate a nighttime commotion in his yard. Alexander was carrying a broomstick to protect himself and defend his 19-year-old pregnant wife and in-laws who were in the home. Alexander was shot twice in the chest and then handcuffed. He was later pronounced dead at a local hospital.

Alexander’s widow has filed suit for wrongful death and his parents have filed a civil rights action against the city of Anaheim for negligent hiring, training and operations which resulted in the shooting death of their son.

LOS ANGELES, Calif. - The ACLU of Southern California commends the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for approving a study by the Vera Institute of Justice on how to effectively reduce the county's overcrowded and inefficient jail system while saving taxpayers millions of dollars. Preliminary work on the new study will get under way this week.

The ACLU/SC has long supported efforts to reduce the county's dangerously overcrowded jail system, which is the largest and most congested jail system in the nation, and has an average length of stay that is two to three times greater than other, comparable jails. Longer length of stay means greater overcrowding, intolerable living conditions for inmates and increased security risks for both deputies and inmates.

'Los Angeles County's criminal justice system is so backed up that many people are stuck for months in the jail, although they pose no risk to public safety, simply because they are too poor to make bail. Although these pretrial detainees are presumed innocent, the overcrowded conditions in which they are housed expose them to extreme violence and harsh and degrading conditions that violate all constitutional minimums,' said Melinda Bird, ACLU/SC senior counsel.

'We hope that with the help of consultants from Vera, the county will implement much-needed systematic changes, including the creation of comprehensive, pretrial alternatives for inmates with mental and physical disabilities. These are needed to halt the revolving door between incarceration and the street, save taxpayers money and create a humane and safer way to treat those awaiting trial,' Bird added.

The ACLU/SC is the court-ordered monitor of conditions and medical care within all Los Angeles County jail facilities.

Vera Institute is a nationally renowned non-profit organization that has worked with New York City to develop strategies for managing jail populations. After New York implemented many of Vera's recommendations, its jail population fell --without any increase in crime -- from 21,000 inmates in 1991 to 14,000 inmates in 2003.

The first step in the study will begin at noon on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 when representatives of the Vera Institute will lay out plans for the study to the county's top law-enforcement officials at a public meeting of the Chief Executive Office/Countywide Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee. The meeting is at the Los Angeles County Hall of Administration, 500 West Temple Street, Room 739.

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. - The ACLU of Southern California filed a lawsuit today against the city of Santa Barbara for intentionally violating the constitutional rights of disabled homeless people by criminalizing them through enforcement of its 'anti-sleeping ordinance,' while giving them no reasonable alternative to sleeping on the streets. The lawsuit - on behalf of certain homeless residents --was filed in federal district court in Los Angeles.

On April 1, more than 100 homeless people, including many with physical and/or mental disabilities, will be compelled to leave safe and secure shelter beds at Santa Barbara's Casa Esperanza emergency shelter because the city permits the shelter to operate only from December through March. These chronically homeless individuals -- who have mental orphysical disabilities and have been homeless repeatedly or for an extended period of time -- will have no alternative to sleeping on the streets or in other public places, and will be at serious risk for being cited for illegal activity by police.

Santa Barbara's anti-sleeping ordinance makes it illegal for any person to sleep between sunset and 6 a.m. on any public beach, street, sidewalk or public way. In enforcing this ordinance, the Santa Barbara Police Department routinely intimidates and harasses disabled homeless people with interrogations, warrant checks, unauthorized searches and arrests, and citations. Yet city officials have acknowledged a serious lack of beds and resources for its chronically homeless residents. A conservative estimate puts the number of chronically homeless people in Santa Barbara County at nearly 950.

"By citing and arresting mentally ill or physically disabled homeless persons for sleeping inpublic places when there are no reasonable alternatives available to them, the city engages inarbitrary and unreasonable conduct that shocks the conscience and bears no reasonablerelation to public health of safety," said Mark Rosenbaum, legal director for the ACLU/SC. "Essentially, the city and its law-enforcement personnel treat the chronically homeless as if they were outlaws."

Accrual of citations and fines can affect an individual's ability to renew a driver's license andreceive state benefits. Accrued citations or the failure to appear at citation or misdemeanorhearings can lead to an arrest warrant and incarceration. An arrest for a homeless individual is particularly devastating because it may result not only in the loss of liberty but also in the loss of all possessions, including warm clothing and critically important documents necessary for identification and government benefits.

Already this year, 11 homeless people have died on the streets of Santa Barbara - a tragic measure of how hazardous the conditions on the streets there are for homeless individuals.

'Closing scarce shelter beds at a time when there are no alternatives is indefensible,' said Lori Rifkin, staff attorney for the ACLU/SC. 'Study after study in cities across the country has shown that providing housing with services for homeless people is effective at ending homelessness,and costs less than leaving homeless people on the streets.'

Santa Barbara is the second affluent beach city to be sued in recent months by the ACLU/SC over the treatment of homeless people. In December, the ACLU/SC filed suit against the Orange County city of Laguna Beach over a similar anti-sleeping ordinance that criminalized chronically homeless people. Earlier this week, the Laguna Beach City Council responded to that lawsuit by repealing its anti-sleeping ordinance.

In Santa Barbara, city officials have periodically grappled with the issue of homelessness since at least 1984. At that time, the city was urged to repeal its anti-sleeping ordinance, but the city ignored that recommendation. In February 2009, a report by the Santa Barbara City Council Subcommittee on Homelessness and Community Relations acknowledged 'the strong need formore shelter beds for vulnerable populations.' Yet Santa Barbara's anti-sleeping ordinance remains in effect, and its strategies to address homelessness remain targeted at reducing the visibility of homeless individuals rather than reducing homelessness.