Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton has appointed a "Gang Czar" to help in that city's fight against gang crime. We wrote about Bratton's announcement he would seek federal aid in the fight yesterday.

The new czar is Michael Hillman, "a former SWAT supervisor and member of the anti-terrorism squad."

At his swearing in Wednesday, Hillman "served notice that while the latest anti-gang effort would not throw the Bill of Rights out of the window, it would also undoubtedly lead to an increased number of "field contacts" in which patrol officers stop citizens on the street to be questioned and sometimes frisked."

"Make no mistake about it, for us to be able to do this, we are going to need the community's support," Hillman told television station KCAL in an interview earlier Wednesday."

"We are also going to need support for the fact that police officers are going to be able to stop people based on reasonable suspicion and probable cause."

"Bratton said Wednesday that he and Hillman were on the same page in term of strategies to combat gangs and that "he understands my goal of gaining the respect of the community."

Los Angeles has the highest murder rate in the country. Officials believe the city's 100,000 gang-bangers heavily contribute to it.

Bratton's plan is to involve the feds by charging the gang members with federal crimes like racketeering and tax evasion. He said the strategy worked in fighting the mob in NY and it should also work in LA.

One criminologist is not so sure. "Criminologist Howard Abadinsky told the Los Angeles Times that the New York mob investigations were run by the FBI and took years of patient surveillance to put together. In addition, he said, Los Angeles gangs are far larger than the Mafia."

"You need to stop recruitment," he said. "The problem you've got in L.A. is you have an unlimited supply of applicants."

We think Mr. Abadinsky has a point. One way to stop recruitment is to offer options to the at-risk youth of South Central --through programs that offer a way out of that hellhole.

Hopefully, not all of LA's money will be spent on enforcement and some will go towards prevention. Knowing Bratton, he's thought of this long before we have.

"A federal appeals panel in San Francisco ruled yesterday that the atheist father who challenged the Pledge of Allegiance on behalf of his daughter had a right to bring the case. In its ruling, the panel reaffirmed its view that allowing schoolchildren to hear the words "under God" in the pledge amounts to "unconstitutional indoctrination."

Through Jim Cappozola at Rittenhouse Review, we learned that Ms. magazine is assembling a roster of women bloggers. Here are the details, and they are seeking recommendations.

Thanks to Jim for recommending us. He too is seeking the names and blog addresses of other women bloggers, both to recommend to Ms. and to add to his blogroll. So please send your favorites to him at rittenreview@earthlink.net.

Also thanks to Sisyphus Shrugged for recommending us.

Here are some of our favorites:

Lisa English of Ruminate This
Jeanne D'Arc of Body and Soul
Avedon Carol of Sideshow
Gail Davis of GailOnline
MadKane
Sisyphus Shrugged
Beyond Corporate
Kim at Free Pie
Teresa Nielsen-Hayden of Making Light
Ann Salisbury of Two Tears in a Bucket
Talkabluestreak
Eve Tushnet

Please give them a read and send your favorites to Ms. Magazine and Jim. We're know we've missed a bunch, so feel free to add them in the comments section here as well.

Check out MSNBC's Altercation which we again guest-hosted today for Eric Alterman who returns tomorrow.

Our topics include the Democrats' need to take a sharp left turn (advice former President Clinton disagrees with;) cities passing anti-war resolutions on Iraq; a new study showing marijuana is not a gateway drug; a made for Court TV movie airing tonight on false confessions; and a final Shanghai update on technology.

Via Hamster, Working for Change has reprinted a 1998 Molly Ivins column on asset forfeiture reform. The civil asset forfeture act did receive a welcome overhaul in 2000 (thanks mostly to the conservative republicans like Henry Hyde and Bob Barr, who so strongly believe in property rights) despite efforts by the Justice Department (yes, under Clinton) to weaken it.

Still, we didn't get as much as we wanted in the bill and Ivins' article highlights the problems with forfeiture laws.

For more on problems with forfeiture laws, visit FEAR (Forfeiture Endangers Americans' Rights)

A federal judge has ruled that lawyers for detained "dirty bomb" suspect Jose Padilla can challenge his detention in court.

The ruling is a setback for the Government whose lawyers have been arguing that the Administration's decision to detain suspects as enemy combatants is not subject to judicial review.

The Judge, Michael Mukasey, did not reach the issue of whether Padilla is being detained lawfully, but the decision allows Padilla's defense counsel to seek his release and to meet with him at least until a decision is made.

The decision is a partial victory for the White House as well in that it holds ''The president ... has both constitutional and statutory authority to exercise the powers of commander in chief, including the power to detain unlawful combatants, and it matters not that Padilla is a United States citizen captured on United States soil.''

The full text of the decision is available here.

The Supreme Court hears argument today in Martinez v. Chavez, a case that may determine the continued viability of Miranda rights. We reported on it here.

Massachussetts Senator and presidential hopeful John Kerry is looking better and better to us. He was interviewed Sunday by Tim Russert on Meet the Press about his opinions on the death penalty. Here's what he said:

MR. RUSSERT: David Broder wrote a column in June which I want to show you again: ”[Sen. John] Kerry is also a man who opposes the death penalty, wants to restrict access to guns and voted against the resolution approving the start of ground operations against Saddam Hussein in 1991—just what you would expect from Ted Kennedy’s partner and Michael Dukakis’s running mate, the Republicans will surely say.”

The Congressional Quarterly does an analysis of key votes and let me show you. Over the last four years, Kennedy and Kerry voted exactly alike 100 percent of the time over your 17 years in the Senate now. You’ve voted, like, 93 percent of the time. Will you have Senator Kennedy’s support for your presidential run?

SEN. KERRY: Well, it’s up to Senator Kennedy to make any announcement about his support, but Icertainly would want it and I would welcome it. I think he’s an extraordinary legislator, and the fights he has fought are fights that have made a difference to the quality of life of our fellow Americans. I differ with him on some issues. He knows that, and I think you have to look at those issues. I voted...

MR. RUSSERT: But won’t you be branded another Massachusetts Ted Kennedy liberal?

SEN. KERRY: I think, Tim, as people get to know me in the course of this, they’ll know the things that I have fought for and the things I stand for. I was a prosecutor. I’ve sent people to jail for the rest of their life. I’m opposed to the death penalty in the criminal justice system because I think it’s applied unfairly, as even Republican governors have determined, and because I’m for a worse punishment. I think it is worse to take somebody and put them in a small cell for the rest of their life, deprived of their freedom, never to bed. Now, I think that’s tougher. Let me just finish.

MR. RUSSERT: But, Senator, why shouldn’t Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the Oklahoma building, or if John Muhammad is convicted of being a sniper here in Washington—why shouldn’t they receive the death penalty?

SEN. KERRY: Tim, I think that, as I said, you know, different people have different opinions about what’s worse. I’ve seen people die and I know what it’s like to almost die. I don’t think that—you know, dying is scary for a while, but in the end, the punishment is gone. When you’re alive and you’re deprived of your freedom each day and you’re in tough circumstances—and I’m talking about tough circumstances. I’m not talking about some cushy situation where they live off the fat of the land in prison. I’m talking about tough. But if you’re deprived of that freedom for the rest of your living days until God decides to take you, you know, that is tough, my friend, and I think that plenty of people think that.

Now, I don’t think it is right to have a criminal justice system that kills innocent people. Over 100 people have been released from death row in America in the last year with DNA evidence and other evidence showing they didn’t commit the crime for which they had been committed, some of them in jail for 10, 15 years for a crime they didn’t commit.

MR. RUSSERT: So you would have a moratorium on the death penalty until there’s further research.

SEN. KERRY: I’ve said that previously. I think we need to look at it. But more importantly, Tim, that’s not affected at the federal level. That’s not where the crime of this country is fought. It’s fought state for state by state prosecutors. That’s where it’s done. And I would honor, obviously, the laws of those states and that’s the way we should proceed. But far more importantly, are we going to do the things in this country...

MR. RUSSERT: So if a state had a death penalty, you would respect it?

SEN. KERRY: Of course. You have to respect the law. The law of the land is the law of the land, but I have also said that I am for the death penalty for terrorists because terrorists have declared war on your country. And just as I, in a war, was prepared to kill in defense of my nation, I also believe that you
eliminate the enemy and I have said publicly that I support that.

MR. RUSSERT: So you would have an exception in your moral opposition for terrorists?

SEN. KERRY: That is correct. It’s not moral. I have said that I object to it on the basis of the way it’s applied and the way that it’s not the toughest punishment, but I do believe with respect to terrorists, that is correct.

Other Kerry news:

In Cleveland Tuesday, Kerry came right out and said it: Bush is using Iraq as a distraction from the nation's economic problems.

"Lethal Indifference: The Fatal Combination of Incompetent Attorneys and Unaccountable Courts in Texas Death Penalty Appeals" is a comprehensive study of the quality of representation afforded to death row inmates in the state post-conviction process. Not surprisingly, as the New York Times reports, the study finds "Death row inmates in Texas are often assigned incompetent or unqualified state appellate lawyers who do not raise legitimate constitutional arguments and who fail to unearth facts that could prove the innocence of their clients."

"The overall message of the study is that our post-conviction system is broken in Texas," said Jim Marcus, executive director of Texas Defender Service and an author of the report. "Our system is so unreliable that innocent people or people with serious constitutional questions in their case are going to be executed without any real review."

The study also finds fault with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state's highest criminal court. "It accused the court of often appointing unqualified and inexperienced lawyers to handle state habeas appeals, noting that one lawyer still listed by the court as approved is dead. The study also criticized the court as being indifferent when presented with persuasive evidence that an inmate was being poorly represented."

While declining formal comment, a spokesman for the Court had this to say: "We've seen these criticisms before."

LA Police Chief William Bratton has a new strategy for fighting the city's gangs: Calling in the Feds.

Bratton will ask the U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles to charge gang members with tax and racketeering offenses, a tactic, he said, that met with success against the Mob.

We've noticed the police department has a whole new jargon under Bratton:

"The initiative will not mean mass arrests, but targeted policing, said Assistant Chief Jim McDonnell."

"We don't want to come out like we did in the '80s," McDonnell said, referring to "occupying army" tactics favored by former chiefs. "We're planning a holistic, collaborative approach to the problem."

One local minister in South Central LA who works with gang members is not buying the new strategy:

"You're going to fill up the jail up with them again," said Rev. Nathan Holt, who operates the Love and Respect Youth Organization. "Shouldn't there be some training programs or something else?"

Our initial thoughts: The gang problem in LA is out of control. Bratton is committed to reducing crime in LA. His pattern has been the "broken window" system of policing--arresting people for little things to clean up the streetss and get useful information on bigger crimes and criminals.

He has not been a whosale violator of civil rights in the past, although we did have a problem with the targeted arrests of the squeegie operators and the subway turnstile jumpers.

The violence needs to end in LA. Jail terms for petty crimes and even tax evasion are far less than those for crack and murder. We'd rather see gang members receive shorter sentences for lesser crimes so they don't lose their hope for a future. And we think on the whole, you get a better shot at a fair trial in federal court than state court, which is where tax offenses and racketeering cases are tried.

We remain behind Bratton. But we'll keep watching and reporting as well.

The prosecutor in the Winona Ryder shoplifting trial recommends drug and psychiatric counseling along with restitution and community service for Winona Ryder, convicted last month of shoplifting at Saks in Beverly Hills.

The People filed their sentencing memorandum Monday, you can read the whole thing at Smoking Gun, which summarizes the DA's recommendations as a request for the Judge "to order the actress to serve 480 hours of community service and to cease using aliases, specifically the handle "Emily Thompson." When the 31-year-old actress was arrested last December for shoplifting, Beverly Hills cops found Ryder carrying a remarkable array of painkillers (liquid Demerol, Percodan, Vicodin, Morphine Sulfate, etc.), some of which were prescribed to the Thompson alias. Prosecutors also want Ryder sentenced to a provision that would allow law enforcement officers to search "her person and property" at any time, "with or without a warrant or probable cause."

Sentencing is set for Friday. With the DA not seeking jail, the hearing will likely focus on conditions of probation.

Instapundit has the latest developments in the Racine Rave Prosecution.