Archive for the ‘Graffiti Debate’ Category

LA Photographer Faces Criminal Charges, Appeals for Help

Thursday, May 6th, 2010
Los Angeles-based photographer Jonas Lara faces up to a year in prison if convicted of aiding and abetting two graffiti artists whose work he was documenting when the three men were arrested on February 2, 2010 in South Central Los Angeles.

Lara has declined two plea deals and has pleaded not guilty to the charge, believing that he was within his rights as a photographer to be at the scene documenting the work of the artists. However Lara says his public defender, David Gottesmann, has so far refused to consider his rights as a photographer as part of the defense. “Every time I bring [photographer’s rights or First Amendment rights] up, he just laughs at me,” Lara says.

Jeff Sedlik, Lara’s former teacher, has offered to testify on his behalf to establish his credibility as a photographer, but Lara says Gottesman insists that the case has nothing to do with Lara being a photographer.

Lara has appealed for help with the case to rights organization like the ACLU, but Lara says the organizations have told him they do not get involved in criminal cases.

If convicted, the Art Center College of Design graduate and former US Marine would be unable to enter the MFA program at the School of Visual Arts, into which he was recently accepted, in September.

Recognizing the need to hire a private attorney, Lara has established a legal fund to solicit help from friends, family and colleagues. Lara’s jury trial is scheduled for next Tuesday, May 11.

Lara’s camera, lenses and memory cards, which he uses to make a living, were also seized, and have not been returned to him.

When he was arrested, Lara was working on a long-term project for which he has documented the work and creative processes of 30 visual artists. Lara met the two graffiti artists at an abandoned building in South Central Los Angeles to photograph the pair as they worked on the illegal mural.

An LAPD helicopter spotted the group of three men and a patrol car was quickly on the scene. The artists attempted to walk away from the scene and were apprehended, Lara says. He remained at the scene and was arrested, although the arresting officers never let Lara know what he was being charged with.

The photographer says the officers were understanding when he explained his reason for being at the scene. They told him they needed to process him, and that he would be free to go in the morning. After advising Lara that it would be dangerous to leave his car in the neighborhood, one of the officers even drove Lara’s car to the police station so he could avoid a towing fee.

Once he got to the police station, however, Lara’s situation became much more precarious. The police held Lara for eight hours before telling him he was being charged with felony vandalism. He was held for 26 hours in total.

Two weeks after being bailed out by his wife, Lara was arraigned and the charge of felony vandalism was downgraded to a misdemeanor. At a pretrial hearing Gottesman told Lara that rather than vandalism, he was now being charged with damaging a fence at the scene. Then the charge was later switched again, this time to the misdemeanor of aiding and abetting. Prosecutors now claim Lara was acting as a lookout for the two graffiti artists.

Lara started his legal defense fund when it became clear to him that the charges against him would not be dropped. Those interested in donating to Lara’s legal defense fund can do so here:

Jonas Lara Legal Defense Fund Paypal Page.

Paypal payments can also be directed to donate@jonaslaradefensefund.org.

Via: www.pdnpulse.com

Art Crime: Graffiti Wars – “the crackdown may only have emboldened them”

Monday, February 22nd, 2010

Law enforcement agencies, judges and politicians around the country are stepping up their battle against graffiti artists. But the crackdown may only have emboldened them.

In March 2009, a man identified by Pittsburgh Police as “HERT,” the city’s second most-wanted graffiti artist, entered the Allegheny County Courthouse for an appearance stemming from a prior arrest.

But when he arrived, he was informed that police also had warrants for his arrest on 69 misdemeanors and four felony counts of criminal mischief based on estimated damages from vandalism caused by the 22-year-old’s alleged activities of spray-painting his tag on public and private buildings, railroad properties, and nearly a dozen neighborhoods in and around Pittsburgh’s downtown corridor. HERT was then handcuffed and escorted from the courtroom.

TV cameras were there to capture the moment, and Detective Daniel Sullivan of Pittsburgh Police Bureau’s Graffiti Task Force, made sure the media knew the significance of the arrest.

“He was the number-two tagger in the city, hitting more than 100 pieces of property, and that doesn’t include outside boroughs,” Sullivan told reporters, adding that HERT had caused an estimated $212,000 in damages to private and public property during his graffiti career.

The case of HERT, who is still awaiting trial, illustrates what some observers believe is an increasing crackdown on graffiti across the country. While, nationwide statistics on graffiti crime do not exist, the reallocation of police department budgets and resources suggests that cities are increasingly using prosecutions as a weapon to end the practice. For example, Graffiti Tracker, an Omaha, Nebraska-based company, which investigates graffiti crimes under contract with law enforcement agencies or sells them analysis software, is doing a thriving business. According to Timothy Kephart, Graffiti Tracker’s CEO, the company has over $1 million in contracts with police departments in 45 cities, towns and municipalities.

And more cities like Pittsburgh have created “vandal squads” dedicated to capturing high-profile graffiti artists, similar to the force New York City instituted decades ago.

But the subtext of this battle is cultural.

Read More

Army engineers clean up graffiti along L.A. River

Sunday, December 27th, 2009

The riverbed that runs east of downtown has long been a haven for taggers, an open canvas with easy entry and easy escape routes. Crews are painting over the tags and working to keep new ones out.

For as long as many can remember, the section of the Los Angeles River that runs east of downtown has been an open-air gallery for taggers. No more.

Members of the self-described “Metro Transit Assassins” used the river’s sloping banks for massive tags of their acronym that stretched for blocks and could be seen from passing aircraft. “Buket,” who gained notoriety for tagging the Hollywood Freeway overpass, put his black-bordered, mint-green moniker here at its biggest and boldest.

But in recent months, these tags and tens of thousands of others have begun to vanish beneath coats of grayish-white paint. And with the year drawing to a close, the river is almost as blank a canvas as when its concrete channel was built early in the last century.

[Read More]

Graffiti writer gets eight years.

Tuesday, December 15th, 2009

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — A south Texas district judge has sentenced an 18-year-old man to eight years in prison for habitually vandalizing property with graffiti .

Sebastian Perez had pleaded guilty in a Corpus Christi state district court to three graffiti charges, as well as to marijuana possession.

Perez told the judge that spray-painting graffiti had become became a habit, but he stopped when he realized it was getting him nowhere. He cried and asked for probation, saying he would finish high school, get a job and help clean up the mess. The judge, unmoved, assessed the maximum sentence.Police say Perez spray-painted more than two dozen properties from March to August. The Corpus Christi Caller-Times reports that police blamed him for more than $7,300 in damage, leaving his mark on everything from fences and homes to a medical clinic and traffic signs.

via:www.bostonherald.com

To fight graffiti, L.A. Council may restrict spraypaint sales

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

In its continuing effort to reduce graffiti, the Los Angeles City Council is considering expanding restrictions on the sale of aerosol spraypaint cans and other materials to people under 21.

At the request of Councilmen Dennis Zine, Greig Smith and Eric Garcetti, the public safety committee today asked city lawyers to work on a possible ordinance that would outlaw sales to anyone under 21, after seeking recommendations from the Los Angeles Police Department and the city’s legislative analysts.

“We need to make it as tough as possible if we’re going to get serious on the eradication of graffiti in the city of Los Angeles.  Otherwise it’s cosmetic, it does no good and people continually look at us to say ‘What are you doing to fix this problem that is terrorizing neighborhoods?’ ” Zine said Monday during the public safety committee meeting.

Lawyers said there is already a state law prohibiting the sale of spraypaint cans and etching cream to those under 18. Zine said he hoped the council would raise that age limit to 21, and consider other options such as requiring spraypaint purchasers to show identification or making it a crime for a minor to carry spray paint. The city already requires retailers to keep the paint cans in a locked container.

“As we can see by driving down any freeway,” Zine said, “the current laws aren’t working. They are absolutely being ignored and the consequences aren’t severe enough to have an impact.”

In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has signed a series of laws aimed at reducing graffiti.  The city banned the sale of spraypaint cans, etching acids and indelible markers to persons under 21 in 2007 — an expansion of an earlier law that restricted sales of graffiti instruments to those under 18. In 2005, the New York City Council also began requiring property owners with six or more units to remove graffiti from their property within 60 days of receiving notice from the city or face a penalty of up to $300.

Chicago passed a ban on the sale of spraypaint cans and indelible markers within city limits in 1992. Shortly after, the National Paint & Coatings Assn. filed a lawsuit challenging the law and was joined by a group of paint retailers and other businesses.

A federal judge overturned Chicago’s spraypaint ban in 1993, but the city appealed to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which found the restriction to be constitutional. The plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court, which denied the request for appeal in March of 1995. The ban went into effect in April of 1995 after a one-month grace period for retailers to adjust.

– Maeve Reston at L.A. City Hall

Has it come to jail time to wipe out graffiti?

Friday, March 20th, 2009

Like the city of San Francisco, North Beach resident Micki Jones is fighting a losing battle against graffiti.

“I paint it over and it is usually tagged again in 48 hours,” said Jones, who covers up graffiti on her home and other buildings on her block. “It used to be weeks, but now those guys are out there every night.”

When it comes to symbolic statements about a city, nothing speaks louder than the painted scrawls on walls. They say a neighborhood is either unwilling, or unable, to stop vandalism. Graffiti infuriates homeowners, degrades streets and undercuts civil pride.

And yet it happens over and over in San Francisco and has for years. How is that possible? The answers range from the economic downturn (less enforcement), to a lack of consequences (offenders aren’t taken seriously in the courts), to simple fatigue (why paint over the tags when they are back the next day?)

This isn’t a minor problem. The “broken window” theory continues to prove to be true. The theory says each broken window or graffiti tag is a test to see if anyone cares enough to fix it. San Francisco is failing the test.

“As soon as the first tag goes up all bets are off,” said Christopher Putz, the city’s graffiti abatement officer. “It’s like a dog lifting its leg. After the first one does it, every other dog has to tinkle there, too.”

Mohammed Nuru, deputy director of operations for the Department of Public Works, often hears from angry residents at community meetings, but it’s those who have given up on fighting graffiti that he remembers best.

“It is very hard to see some 75- or 80-year-old lady almost in tears because someone has vandalized her house and she can’t do anything about it,” Nuru said.

Public frustration has grown since a 2004 law made property owners responsible for cleaning up graffiti in 30 days or face a fine that could reach $500. Owners complained that it made the victims pay for the crime. Others said that the city ran out of money to pay attorneys to enforce the ordinance.

That’s not to say nothing is being done. Putz said that arrests are up this year and are likely to surpass 2008′s record total of 234. Complaints to the city’s 311 hot line have increased dramatically. And on April 23 the Graffiti Advisory Board – a 25-member group that includes residents, business leaders and city officials – will host a community meeting at the Hilton on Kearny Street to discuss new ways to fight the problem.

Still, it’s hard to disagree with Jones, who has been painting over graffiti in North Beach for 19 years.

“This is a beautiful city,” Jones said, “and it is getting trashed.”

Nuru, who lives in Bayview-Hunters Point, was incensed last week when a freeway sign near the entrance to his neighborhood was rendered unreadable by taggers.

“I totally lost it,” he said. “What I am suspecting is that the vandals are moving more in groups now. We have seen patterns of taggers going in groups to deface property.”

Putz, who has worked with graffiti abatement for over five years, doesn’t necessarily think there are more taggers nowadays. But he is frustrated with the lack of consequences for those who are caught literally red-handed.

“I’ve had kids tell me that they wouldn’t try it in Daly City because that’s San Mateo County and they are treated pretty harshly by the courts,” Putz said.

That’s seconded by Officer Troy Courtney, who was the city’s graffiti expert for seven years. Asked why some other cities, like Seattle, don’t seem to have much tagging, Courtney is blunt.

“You know why?” he asked. “Because in Seattle the first time you get caught you spend six months in jail.”

San Francisco taggers are more likely to get off with community service or probation. That’s a problem because, as is the case with other quality-of-life crimes, a small minority is causing a majority of the problems.

Putz has pushed for a single San Francisco judge to be assigned all graffiti cases so he or she could get familiar with the offenders. But, he said, “nobody wants to be the graffiti judge.”

And finally, there is a school of thought that believes this is art, not a public nuisance. Courtney said taggers come from all over the world to take photos of the San Francisco graffiti murals celebrated on Internet sites and in books.

“It’s like collecting baseball cards,” Courtney said.

For residents like Jones, that’s going to be tough to sell.

“I don’t care if you are Michelangelo,” she said. “If you don’t have permission to write on my building, don’t do it.”

Via:www.sfgate.com

Bob Shallit: Graffiti artists invited to spruce up midtown

Saturday, March 14th, 2009
Tired of cleaning up after taggers, the Midtown Business Association is taking a different tack. It’s actually inviting street artists to splash wild, colorful graffiti on designated walls and buildings.

The concept, which has been tried with mixed results in other cities, is aimed at turning an eyesore into a tourist draw.

“We want to turn (graffiti) into a positive,” says Rob Kerth, the MBA’s executive director. The first suggested location is an alley near 16th and I streets, which sports a series of blank walls.

In some other communities, he notes, city-sanctioned graffiti walls became a disaster after rival gangs “went to war” over control of the sites.

But most Sacramento taggers aren’t in gangs, says the former city councilman. “People doing tagging (in midtown) are just people fighting anonymity,” Kerth says.

Read More

Taking boy to court in graffiti case proves costly

Saturday, March 14th, 2009

He’s 9 years old and facing the long and astonishingly well-funded arm of the law. So far, we’ve sent the boy to a psychiatrist and to a psychologist and next month, we’ll pay for him to see another shrink.

If she agrees that the boy might – might – be made competent to stand trial, we’ll spend six months teaching the kid about the court system so that we can make him pay his debt to society.

Or, we could just make him pay his debt to society.

Actually, we can’t do the latter. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has a policy against such things.

Fortunately, money is apparently no object in this county – pay no attention to that $32 million hole in the budget – and so we are spending thousands to bring this 9-year-old to justice. And, apparently, others like him.

“I see this all the time,” said Robert Dodell, Matthew’s taxpayer-supplied attorney. “Do I think it’s a waste of money? Yeah.”

A spokesman for the County Attorney’s Office says it’s rethinking the policy.

Matthew is a fourth-grader in El Mirage, a soft-spoken kid who loves basketball and skateboarding. A kid who had never been in any trouble until October, when he and three friends decided to deface the neighborhood park with graffiti. Damage estimate: $200.

A few days later, he was called to the principal’s office during math. Waiting for him was an El Mirage police officer, who read him his rights and released him to his parents after he admitted to using a Sharpie to write his initials and one other thing – police say it was an obscenity, Matthew says it was “Sk8″ – on the playground.

Matthew would face his day in court, but first he would face his parents, Christine and Paul, who were none too pleased with their son. “We grounded him,” Paul said. “He wasn’t allowed to play basketball, video games or anything like that for a couple of weeks. What he did was wrong, and he knew what he did was wrong.”

In December, Matthew was summoned to juvenile court, where his parents expected that he would admit his wrongdoing and be ordered to clean up the park. They were all for that.

But attorney Dodell, after talking to Matthew, felt the boy wasn’t competent to stand trial given his age, and so Judge Janelle McEachern ordered a mental-competency evaluation.

Apparently, Dodell was right because the two doctors agreed that the boy doesn’t understand enough about his rights and such to stand trial.

One of the two, however, felt that he could be “restored” to competency – taught enough about court proceedings to face the judge.

The result: Matthew has been ordered to see a third doctor next month – a “tiebreaker.” If she agrees that he can be made competent, we’ll be sending a “restoration specialist” to his school for up to six months, to tutor him about the system.

Dodell says it’s a complete waste of money, but a necessary one. The courts have no choice but to do a full-blown mental-competency exam – the same one given to the St. Johns kid accused of two murders – because the County Attorney’s Office has a policy against putting kids like this into a diversion program.

“In a diversion program, it would probably be some community-service hours, pay for it, and maybe write an essay or attend class on why this is terrible for the community,” Dodell said.

In other words, the same punishment that any judge would likely order, just minus the thousands in psychiatric, legal and “restoration” bills.

Mike Scerbo, spokesman for the County Attorney’s Office, said that the no-diversion policy for graffiti has been in effect since 1995. On Thursday, he defended the policy, noting that the act of writing graffiti is a big problem and adding that it wasn’t the prosecutor’s call to order mental exams.

“It’s the judge’s discretion as to how to deal with the case,” he said. On Friday, Scerbo told me the office is developing a diversion program for such cases.

It probably won’t come soon enough for Matthew, who on April 16 will meet with yet another psychiatrist. No worries. Just put it on our already overburdened tab.

We’re good for it.

We are good for it, aren’t we?

Via:www.azcentral.com

Painting with Permission – Graffiti Documentary

Monday, December 29th, 2008

New store has locals wondering:What is art?

Sunday, December 14th, 2008

Art is in the eye of the beholder. It may also have to do with where one beholds it.In any case, a newly opened graffiti supply store on Georgia Street in downtown Vallejo is eliciting mixed reactions about the nature of art.

“We’re way behind in recognizing and valuing the artistic talents of our young people,” said Harold Beaulieu of Vallejo. “We’re finally making a distinction between graffiti and illegal art, and I’m glad to see these people in Vallejo.”

No one associated with the Graff House Supply Company on the

500 block of Georgia Street could be reached for comment Thursday, but a look inside showed display cases offering various spray paint-related supplies.

Bottles of ink, felt-tip pens, caps and tips, spray paint cans of various colors and vinyl gloves are among the items that appear to be for sale inside. A phone number is written in graffiti style on the establishment’s glass door.

Beaulieu said graffiti is bad, but illegal art is only bad when it defaces other people’s property.

“It is the future,” said Beaulieu, owner of Georgia Street’s The Art Department. “It must be decriminalized. Art evolves. It defines who we are, and what’s important to us.”

On the other hand, longtime Vallejo business and building owner Buck Kamphausen said he’s appalled that there’s a graffiti supply store in Vallejo.

“That’s unbelievable,” said Kamphausen, owner of the USA World Classics Event Center downtown. “I can’t believe anyone would open a store like that. It just shows there’s no respect for people’s property. We have to paint over that stuff all the time.”An anonymous police source echoed the sentiment.

“I can’t believe this store went in,” he said. “It just shows the path Vallejo is taking. They accept this store, but kick Wal-Mart out.”

One of the owners of the newly opened 531 Gallery, right next door to Graff House Supply, said they’d have preferred the store not be adjacent to the gallery, which opened last month. It is an unfortunate coincidence, said manager Shawn Whisenant, that 531′s first exhibit focuses on graffiti-style art.

“We’re a fine and contemporary art gallery, and our first artist — San Francisco’s Akayo — depicts a city environment,” Whisenant said. “We were concerned when they opened next door that people might confuse them with us, and, in fact, people have. But we’re not them.”

Whisenant said the gallery is bringing “the best national and international artists to Vallejo,” as well as featuring local talent. Its next show will be a photographic exhibit featuring a wide range of subject matter from landscapes to fashion to skateboarders, he said.

“It’s kind of a funny coincidence that they opened and our first show is graffiti art,” Whisenant said. “I’d have really rather not have them next door to us, but I’m happy to see people trying to open nearly any type of business here.”

Whisenant said it would be best if an acceptable place could be found to display and regulate urban art. And Kamphausen said he recognizes there are degrees of graffiti ranging from gang tagging to work that shows real artistic talent. He just doesn’t want to have to keep cleaning either type off his property, he said.

“If we have to be the first city in America with a graffiti store, well, that’s just unbelievable,” he said.