California vs. Cannick: The Pretrial

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

The People of the State of California
vs. Jasmyne Cannick
Round Two: The Pretrial


Just a quick update on my case and since anything I say can and will be used against me, I’m not going to elaborate much.  Besides, honestly there isn’t that much to tell.

Today I appeared in court for my pretrial hearing on charges that I resisted an officer.  I am charged with three counts of resisting an officer P69, P148a1 and V2800 (a) stemming from the protest that occurred in downtown Los Angeles on November 26, 2014.

The hearing was continued until the end of the month so that some business could be handled.  See, I told you, not much to tell.

I did participate in a press conference with attorney Nana Gyamfi prior to my hearing calling attention to the fact that the City Attorney’s office is engaged in selective and retaliatory prosecution of Black Lives Matter Activists and others and trying to criminalize Black civic engagement.

This has a lot to do with the fact that with somewhere near 500 protest related arrests since last year’s Trayvon Martin protests up to today, less than 10 percent of those arrested have actually been charged. Almost all of the people selected or targeted for criminal charges are connected to or are believed to be connected to Black Lives Matter.

Although I know it is assumed by the police and the media that because one is Black they are automatically inducted into Black Lives Matter at birth, lol, that’s not the case with me.  I’ve never been a member of the group.  My charges, I believe have to do solely with Chief Beck, his daughter and that horse–of course.

Last week I wrote about how the City Attorney’s office was denied a protective order on behalf of Chief Beck and Mayor Eric Garcetti against two activists .  Well, they tried to get one again today in court.  After my hearing was continued I went and sat in on Evan Bunch’s arraignment in Dept. 40.  The City Attorney in his case, one Jennifer Wexler, went before the same judge that denied her office last week and asked for a second time.  I guess she was thinking that if at first you don’t succeed try and try again.  Well, the judge said no–again.

Still I must say, this is both an interesting strategy and a sad commentary on behalf of the Mayor, Police Chief, and the City Attorney–two of which I supported being elected into their current office.

Anyway, I’m not back in court until the 29th so I’ll keep you posted.

In closing, a special shout out to my Front Page family that came out in support today.  And remember, if you stay ready you don’t have to get ready.


My actual arrest

KNBC news report on my arrest

Video from the protests on Nov. 26


The Court of Public Opinion

  • robert peel

    if a citizen used a motorcycle like that god only knows what the police responce would be.lapd has no clue how to handle crowds.

  • cutty sark

    Who are we to ask why Chief Beck, King Garcetti and Lord Feuer are doing what they do?

    Isn’t it enough to know they will ignore you when it is convenient for them, oppose you when it suits them, use the courts to drain you and immobilize you when they believe you might get in their way – and they will eliminate you if they fear you could expose them or stop them from carrying out their plans.

  • cutty sark

    At the time Ezell Ford was shot and killed in mid-August 2014, an appeals court had accepted briefs, heard arguments and were pending release of their ruling in a case which was unrelated to Ezell Ford.
    The court ruling issued in September, 2014. Legal observers noted its significance in upholding a principle of potential personal liability for govt. agents(police, prosecutors) who allow evidence which they know is incorrect to be used to win conviction against a defendant at criminal trial.

  • Jury trial all the way….do NOT pull a Daniele Watts on me…

  • The cops can certainly be held liable for withholding “Brady” evidence, but not the prosecutors, unless they were somehow involved with the actual investigation. Prosecutorial immunity applies even for willful violations of constitutionally protected rights, as long as it was as a PROSECTOR, but once they help with an investigation they are no longer prosecutors.

  • Pingback: California vs. Cannick aka ????????: More Pretrial Madness | Jasmyne Cannick()

  • Pingback: California vs. Cannick: It's the Final Countdown | Jasmyne Cannick()