December 21, 2025 • 42 mins
Chris Martin is a lawyer, community organizer, singer and songwriter. He grew up in South Central, Los Angeles, where he graduated from Dorsey High School in 2006. He then attended the University of California, Santa Barbara, where he graduated with a double major in English and History, and holds a Juris Doctorate from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law. At UC Hastings. On this podcast we unbox baffling left coast issues including the LA City Council's recent decision to divert potentially millions of dollars above their budget for police recruitment.
https://www.instagram.com/doc_martin88/
https://www.instagram.com/diprimaradio/
https://www.instagram.com/doc_martin88/
https://www.instagram.com/diprimaradio/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey to La Talk fifteen eighty Good morning, good morning,
good morning, and God bless I'm Dominique Deprima this show
it's called First Things First and my first thing today
and every day is given Thanksgiving, praises, just prayer given
Thanksgiving praises, asking for blessings from the Most High, asking
for the blessings of the ancestors and the elders. And
(00:20):
let's go good. A lot going on and it's all
stuff you want to be here for. It's a it's
a big, big day around here. That what they used
to say. Anyway, I'm happy to be here. I'm happy
you're here. It is a wealth building Wednesday, and this
is how things go down on a wealth building Wednesday.
(00:41):
Our one we look local. Start the top of the
second hour with a wealth Building Wednesday Spotlight, where we
will highlight a business or an opportunity for businesses that
are either innovative, black owned, they're local and small, which
is also important to support and or socially in a
So all that is going on, then our three we
(01:04):
are going to be talking about AI and technology for
your kids, the toys, all the x mis kwansa stuff
as well as for you okay, looking forward to that
conversation with Jamiica Marshall. So right now in studio, I
think I used to call them partner in politics. Here
to give his take on that. In the third he's
(01:26):
a lawyer or community organizer, a singer, and a songwriter
who grew up in South LA. South central is what
it says. Are you one of the ones? I'll ask
him once he gets on the mike. He went to
UC Santa Barbara, graduated in English and history, and he's
got his law degree from Hastings College of Law and
(01:47):
he served there as co president of the Black Law
Students Association. Attorney Chris Martin, good morning, Good morning man.
You know what I feel like, Well you probably know
better than I do, being a musician, but it seems
like LA is having a little renaissance right now. Maybe
we've been having it, I think for a while, but
(02:09):
I feel like it's picking up with live music. Yes,
I mean the live music performance venues and the bands
and the people, the fans that come out and appreciate it. It's
really robust.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
I think absolutely. It's a beautiful thing to see that
folks still want to, you know, or take in live music.
You know, as a musician myself. You know, I just
performed on this past Sunday in Long Beach, you know,
so how was that?
Speaker 1 (02:37):
It was good? It was good good, Yeah, because the
people are here for it. I feel like the more
stressed out we get with national politics and local politics,
the more we want to go see live music.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Absolutely. I mean it's something too, you know. It just
kind of just kindly distract us from you know, what's
going on in the world just for a minute, you know,
and that's a beautiful thing.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Yeah, And I think it also inspires creative courage and
you know, courage in other parts of life. Like, okay,
am I going to be outspoken? I'm feeling real, real inspired.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
You know.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
I went to see Terrace Martin last night, and I mean,
you know, I'm a huge fan of his, but it
was just off the hook and what I left about
it seemed like most of the crowd was millennial and
younger and out to see jazz and just having a
great time. And of course the band sounded amazing. So yeah,
(03:34):
I'm all in ten today. Chris absolutely intent and you know,
I love also with terrorists. You know, it's just like
fifteen hundred or nothing of some of these other groups.
It's a lot of it is local talent.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Yeah, absolutely, there's a lot of local talent out here
in LA and in South Central and you know where
I come from, A forty third and Central Avenue, shout
out to the east Side. You know.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
Of course, I think that's true and also really underrated
because when we think of LA, we think of movie
stars and money and people on the beach. That's what
people well, that's what people. I'm from the Bay, so
that's what people think of LA when they think of here.
What part of the bear Are you from San Francisco. Yeah,
but you know, LA has adopted me, and I'm honored
(04:24):
to be adopted here. But it's both scholars like the
African afrocentric scholars like Asha Quasi and Renoco Rashidi and
doctor Tony Humbert from Southern California, from South Central and
then you know, you've got your Kemasi Washington's, You're you know,
Terrace Martin's, you know, Alex Eisley's just all these folks
(04:49):
that are from here. It's it's a real blessing.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
I think it is. It is. I mean, LA has
so much talent and there's more to come.
Speaker 1 (04:59):
For sure that we're where can we see you performing?
I mean, you're so busy, right, you're rumor? Has it?
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Well?
Speaker 1 (05:07):
I think we announced on this show you're running for office. Yes,
you have a private law practice which is booming, and
you have a band.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
Yes, and it's no longer a rumor. All the paperwork
is fout. I'm officially a candidate for Los Angeles City
Council District nine.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Wow. When was the deadline? It just passed?
Speaker 3 (05:27):
Right?
Speaker 2 (05:29):
I believe the deadline where it hasn't passed it is
in February.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Okay, leave it to you to be ahead of the deadline. Yeah,
So by that means we'll be in full swing with
election in February because a lot of people talk to talk.
But it's more than a notion, right, you need a
fair number of verified signatures, yes, and a fee?
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Yes? Right, Yes, you need five hundred signatures and a
three hundred dollars fee, or if you get a thousand
and signatures, you don't have to pay the.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
Three really yeah, but that's really more like two or
three thousand signatures because they have to be verified, right.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
They have to be verified voters in the district registered,
you know, all.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
Of that, which is harder than it sounds.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
It's harder than it sounds, but uh, it's possible. It's doable.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
And we think like, oh, I just get my mom
in them and wait eleven twelve, right, get up to
one thousand. Well, that's interesting that that'll be an interesting race.
I think next year is going to be a lot
for the City of Los Angeles. We've got mayor. Yeah,
we've got governor's race, a couple city city councils. It's
(06:42):
odd number districts, right, right, I think it's yeah, all
the odd number districts, so weird. We we alternate, that's true,
between the odd and even. And do you know, do
you know who you're supporting for governor yet? I don't.
I haven't decided. And it seems like, I, yes, we
should wait until after the deadline, right, because it seems
(07:03):
like a lot of people are running.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
For a lot of people are running, you know. I
mean I have been seeing viragos ad a lot of
the you know, the black political events, so I do
see that he's you know, working to you.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
Know, he's doing his thing. Yeah. Well, I mean, look,
he's been mayor of Los Angeles. He knows without us
is not going down, right, Yeah, at least not for
not for any candidate of color. Right, you ain't gonna
be it's crazy. You're not going to be a black
mayor without Latinos and you're not gonna be Latino mayor
without black people not in LA.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
Absolutely, Absolutely, that black vote and that Latino vote is
super important.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
Yeah, but there's a distinct possibility And I maybe talked
about this too much, but I don't think enough that
we could have two Republicans in the in the guminatorial primary,
because right now, the two Republicans are in the top three,
and we don't we have we we don't have you know,
(08:03):
the type of primary where you get one Republican and
one Democrat, you get the top two vote getters. They
could both be Nazi Party, right, they have to pick.
Speaker 2 (08:12):
Its important to get there and vote. Yeah, you don't vote,
then you don't count.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
Yeah. Well, and you can say that because you didn't
just start saying it. You you've been an activist a
long time. It's not just oh, I'm running for office
and now I'm going.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
To say vote right, Absolutely, yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
I mean, and you're a real like you're an actual activist,
like the type that goes to protests and you know,
not just a keyboard warrior.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Well, thank you, I appreciate that. Yeah, it's an honor
to serve my community, something my mom instilled to me
in a young age, you know, and it's working.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Yeah. So we're getting breaking news right now that Warner
Brothers has rejected this deal from param the hostel bid
from Paramount, and they're saying that the Ellison family, which
is you know, Larry Ellison and David Ellison father's son.
Larry Ellison, of course, is the guy behind Oracle. He's
(09:12):
one of the Trump billionaire broligarchs, and he is soon
to be in control of TikTok if that deal goes through.
They had been beaten out by Netflix and now they
did a hostile offer and apparently it's been rejected. Now.
(09:32):
I don't know how enough about this kind of business deals.
I you know, this is a bit above my pay grade.
But my understanding was that the President was going to
put his finger on the scale and try to help
his friend Larry Ellison because partly because he has agreed
to fire a couple of CNN host if he gets
(09:53):
hold of it. How would that work? Could the president
step in? And I mean he can't force the board
to take the deal, Kenny, How's that?
Speaker 2 (10:00):
It seems highly unethical. But with a president like this,
that's what he does. You know, he's an unethical president,
you know, And even if he doesn't do it on
an official level, I mean, of course, you know, he
can go behind the scenes and try to influence things,
you know, Right, That's that's who he is as a
as a person.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
Unfortunately, Wow, well I'm surprised. Miles and I were talking
about this because he plays that lottery i'll call the
stock market. And Paramont said it was going to pay
Warner stockholders thirty bucks a share. Miles thought that was
a pretty tempting offer, but seventy eight billion for the
whole company. But there they said no, and their take
(10:43):
in they're saying no comment, which I think it's hilarious.
No and no comment. No no from Warners and no
comment from Paramount. So it looks like, I don't know,
I guess we'll see what Trump doesn't.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
You're going to see.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
We'll see what the unethical move we never thought of.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Was, right, I mean, And every day it's something new
with him, isn't it.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
Yeah, it's the art of the deal.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Chris, Oh my gosh. You just wonder what the next
day is going to bring with him.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
I mean from a legal mind, are you are you surprised,
like the moves they're making with the Supreme Court, things
they're going after, like right now, they're going after birthright
citizenship now, which we kind of have looked at I've
always thought pretty basic. Yeah, kind of US policy. Is
that surprising you the scope of it, the depth of it,
(11:29):
or you kind of were expecting this.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
I was expecting this, you know once Trump got in there,
you know he was going to including from the first term,
he was going to pack the Supreme Court with people
for the next thirty years who were going to be
in line with what he agrees with, you know, which
allows him to do essentially whatever he wants when it
comes to these laws. Right, Like that's why you know
(11:54):
abortion was held to be or Roe v. Wade was overturned,
you know, because he got the the people in there
that he wanted to be able to change that.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
But I feel like every president wanted to have a
permanent majority on the Supreme Court. Yes, but this one
pushed the envelope and did things that were unethical, you know,
didn't let Obama have his pick, and then went ahead
and they went ahead. Well it was really that was
Mitch McConnell. And then they went ahead and jam their
(12:26):
pick through at the last minute. So now they have
this super majority.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Yeah, I mean it's just crazy that, you know, the
stars I hate to say it like this, but the
stars kind of aligned for him to be able to
you know, cheat, to cheat, you know with you know,
one of the long time Supreme Court justices, you know,
Ruth Bedter Ginsburg, you know, dying in office as opposed
to retiring a little bit earlier in the Obama administration,
(12:54):
where he could have replaced her with, you know, somebody
for the next thirty years who would have been more
in line with liberal and progressive politics. She stayed on
and then passed away, you know, closer to Trump's term,
which allowed him to replace her with a conservative.
Speaker 1 (13:12):
Yeah, that's that. I mean a lot of people are
still angry at her about that. It's like Hubris, you
think you can beat the clock, You think you can
beat Father time. Yeah, I doubt it.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
I think a lot of folks just underestimated his ability
to beat Hillary, you know.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, right to happen. You know, well,
because it seemed like he was like a cartoon character. Yeah,
and he still seems like that.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Yes, he does, and he've been on a grander level now.
You know, he believes that he can operate with impunity.
As Richard Nixon once said, when the president does it,
that means that it is not illegal.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
Okay, more on that when we come forward, Dirney, Chris Martin.
It's my guest, and you're listening to KBLA Top fifteen eighty.
Right now, we're back to me. We're back to attorney
Chris Martin, and you know, I appreciate your giving your
legal expertise on all these different issues that we're facing.
I feel like I should be keeping of running tally
because there's so many stories where I find myself saying, man,
(14:14):
is that legal or what are the legal ramifications for that?
So today a lot of people are talking about Rob
Reiner and his wife Michelle being murdered allegedly by their son,
Nick Reiner, and he's meant to appear in court today
on two counts of first degree murder for killing his parents.
(14:38):
I can't really think of much more tragic than that.
Does any of the legal stuff change because they're related,
And we just saw the similar story with the opera
singer in Santa Monica whose son allegedly stabbed him to death.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
First of all, my heart goes out to that family. Yeah,
you know, I believe that, you know, that's just a
super tragic situation. And when it comes to, you know,
there's the legal aspects of it, when you're talking about family,
I believe that there's a good chance that the defense
(15:21):
attorney is probably going to argue that that the killing
should be downgraded from first degree murder to you know,
second degree murder or you know, voluntary manslaughter or something
like that due to you know, mitigating factors.
Speaker 1 (15:37):
Because he's struggling with drug abuse and or mental health.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Mental health exactly. There may even be an insanity plea.
I'm sure that there would be some type of insanity
plea from the defense attorney related to that, as.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
They're saying that he's hired this really you know, top
level attorney and Jackson defense attorney, and that seems weird
because I'm sure his parents are paying for it his inheritance.
If you murder your parents and their will says that
(16:14):
you are the inheritor, you still get everything.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
It doesn't quite work like that when you when you're
the person who actually kills them, you know. But yeah,
I mean i'd imagine that, you know, what he has
is because of his parents in some way, shape or form.
Speaker 1 (16:33):
Yeah, I mean, just you know, we can all make
our own way. But when you're in and out of rehab,
you know, and you're having mental health issues, you probably
are more than likely living on your parents. So, you know,
the district attorney had a big press conference yesterday and
he is they're holding him without bail. He could be
(16:56):
looking at life without possibility of parole or even the
death penalty, which are our DA has brought back.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
Yes, he has.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
What does that mean that Da Hawkman has brought back
the death penalty? I mean, in real people terms, what
does it mean?
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Well, it certainly means that for various crimes that are
you know, deemed to be heinous, like a first degree
murder of you know, uh, too well respected and beloved uh,
you know, people in the community, that the death penalty
is going to be more likely to happen in a
(17:33):
situation like that, and that's something that's that's that's going
to be on the table there. I mean, I'm not
somebody who I don't personally believe in the death penalty,
but I know that there's a lot of folks out
there who do believe in there are retribution aspects of
our criminal justice system as it pertainers to that.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
Yeah, you know, I don't believe in the death penalty
at all. If if there was, I don't believe that
anyone gets to decide who lives and dies ever, Like,
I just think that's between you and the most high.
But the racism factor, even if I did think the
state had the right to execute because of the racial
bias in the system, I just I don't know how
(18:14):
you can support killing people when everything in our system
is biased against black people.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
You really can't. Because this is like ultimately the death Once,
when somebody's put to death, you know, you can't take
that back. What if there's exculpatory evidence that is found.
You know, people sit on death row for years and years,
you know, and so it's just like, what if there's
exculpatory evidence that is found that could exonerate that person,
(18:43):
you know, but they're killed you know, you can't take
that back. And that has happened countless times.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
And I would imagine I have not seen the data
on this, but I would imagine just from clocking the
news stories of who's getting off death row, they always
seem to be black men.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
Yeah. Absolutely. You know there's a case by the name
of Supreme Court case by the name of McCleskey v. Kemp,
where you know, it proved that people who kill white
victims are far more likely to get the death penalty
than people who kill black victims. Right. It stands for
(19:20):
the notion that when it comes to victims of violence
that ultimately black lives don't matter as much as white lives. Wow,
And so you know there's a bias there as it
pertains of the death penalty that needs to be looked at.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
Yeah, and well, and we know we're much more likely
to get sentenced for any crime to the death penalty
that that I have seen data on compared to anyone else.
So for me, even if I didn't have a moral
problem with someone else deciding who lives and dies, the
fact that that bias is there means it nullifies to me.
(20:00):
It nullifies any moral authority to have such a law. Yeah,
because it's not being applied equally. We got news traffic
in sports right here. Then we're going to continue the
conversation with Attorney Chris Martin on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty. Okay,
So the La City Council on Friday voted they approved
a million dollars for new LAPD recruits for the months
(20:21):
of January and February. Matt Zabo, who does budget and finance,
he's a city administrative officer. He said that they need
an twenty four million in additional dollars for next year
to hire officers. And we are in the middle of
(20:41):
a crazy budget crisis where the mayor had to jump
through hoops and get unions to agree to compromise us
and such in order to avoid any layoffs. She was
able to avoid that. Shout out to the mayor for that.
But now you're telling us out of your neck you
can suddenly find a million dollars now. According to ABC seven,
(21:05):
Marquise Harris Dawson had the hut John Lee Tracy Bark
and they mailed up by the all voted against that million.
They're saying the ABC seven is saying it's because they're
supporting more money, a proposal for four point four million
that was made by by council member Lee.
Speaker 2 (21:24):
Thoughts that is just ridiculous. You know, I don't think
that we need to expand the budget at all for police.
You know, I just wish that even if a fraction
of the money that police get was just spent on
things that will help our community, then now make a
huge difference in our community. That's what I think about it.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
Yeah, it's it's problematic. I mean we I don't understand
how you either have the money or you don't. Because
as the public, I'm gonna stop believing you when you
tell we're broke if you can suddenly pull four point
four million, which is really an annualized twenty four million,
right out of your neck.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
Yeah, absolutely, but you I mean it.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
It doesn't look good. And I'm baffled. Yeah, I'm really baffled.
I'm just surprised. You know, John Lee more or less
a Republican. H Tracy Park more or less a Republican.
By the eye don't know as much about Yeah, our
city council president is a progressive.
Speaker 2 (22:30):
Yeah, yes, he is supposed to be right.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
Yeah, I mean that's a lot of money, twenty four
million dollars. I mean, it sounded bad at four point four,
but we're talking about a time when, according to you know,
Katie Orroslovsky, it's not money that we can make up
by laying off city workers. It's money that will be
part of a structural deficit moving forward.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Yeah, it's just I mean, it's really shame about it.
I don't think that the police need more of a
budget than they already have. They already take up so
much of the city's budget, and if even just a
fraction of that was spent on, you know, things like
making sure that we can get more homeowners in the
ninth District, or you know, we can get more job
(23:17):
training programs in the in the ninth District, or in
the city of Los Angeles in general. I speak about
the ninth District because that's where I was, that's where
I lived, born and raised, and that's where I'm running
running for. But ultimately, if we can spend that money
on the things that actually matter will help our community,
that is what will reduce crime.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
Here's the thing. There's two things about this, Attorney Martin. One,
can we find the money, you know, for other things
we need, you know, like you just said, like houselessness
for example. Okay, that's one thing. The other thing is
if this isn't happening in an election year when people
(23:56):
are vying for the support of the police association, and
that really seems a little suspect. Oh, suddenly we have
to cough up money. It's like somebody's twisting your arm,
you know. Oh look at the timing. Yeah, twenty twenty six.
We have city council races, we have the mayor's race,
we have the governor's race, and suddenly, from out of nowhere,
(24:19):
we find money for the police. Yeah, that is fishy
to me.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Yeah, I mean the money is there to be able
to make a difference in the community, but we have
to push our leaders to use that money for the
right things. We have to push them because somebody else
over there is pushing them to use it for the police.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Well. And the thing about it is if it instantly
made us safe, I think that would be different. But
you know, okay, fine, for everybody, there'll be nobody will
be attacked, there'll be no hate crimes. Suddenly we'll have
no robberies homicides. But that's not how it works.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
It's not how it works at all.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
And so what are we paying for? And I don't know,
I would feel a lot more comfortable with this if
the LA Police Association was not allowed to make donations
two campaigns for one thing.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
Absolutely, absolutely, And we really need to reassess the city's budget.
That's one of the things that I stand on.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
We need to reassess the city's But what does that
mean though, I mean, that's easy to say fix it,
do it better. I mean what do you mean by that?
Reassess and do what.
Speaker 2 (25:35):
Well? Looking at the people's budget for example, you know,
thinking about the things that are like police, like law enforcement,
right where you got so much of the city's budget
being spent on that to the exclusion of other programs
that could actually you know, diminish crime in our city.
(25:56):
But we're not spending it on those things, which actually
is the things that the folks need in order to
not do crime, you know. So we can reassess the
city's budget. We can take it from you know, the
overspending on law enforcement and the militarization of our police,
and we can take that and use it towards the
things that will help our community.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
Yeah, I mean I think that, you know, I've been
part of the last couple of years presenting the people's budget,
last three years, I think. And the thing about it,
one thing it consistently shows, and it is thousands of
people that take this survey, is that people want to
spend less on police. It also less on parking enforcements surprice, right,
(26:40):
And we want to spend more on libraries, parks, jobs,
and mental health services. And that's consistent.
Speaker 2 (26:50):
Yeah, and spend spending more on giving our young folks
something to do so that they're not just feeling like
game banging is the only thing they can do.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
You know, Yeah, for sure that But it's I mean,
I'm reading about this and I'm thinking of the council
members that we have. I called out the council president
because they said he wants even more money. But that
means according to this count nine to six, that means
Hugoso too, Martinez, Alnissa Sernandez, you know, Nithjo Rahman. That
(27:26):
means a lot of people that we consider progressive. Just
Isabel Horado, Yeah, just voted for an election year bonus.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Yeah, yeah, I mean they're taking our votes for granted.
They think they already got it. You know. So it's
like they may feel like it doesn't even matter what
they do that offends the people, you know, because the
police are going to give them all his money.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
I mean if well, so two things, police association gets
dues from cops. So I guess recruiting twenty four million
worth of cops would give them more dues. And then
can they turn around and spend that money to support
whatever candidate they want? So they strong arm the money
out of the city council and then turn around and
(28:15):
use it to either support or undermine all of those
folks who voted or all the odd odd numbered council
members who voted for it. It's very fishy. Police associations
should not be allowed to donate to city politics. I
just don't think they should. You're supposed to be protecting
(28:37):
and serving everybody, absolutely and certainly not in election years
on any budget items concerning cops. The wholes all the
odd number years have to recuse themselves if they're running
for office.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
Okay, we got to hold our leaders accountable.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
And so we were talking about this off the mic
that accountability does is not equal opportunity though right, yes,
I mean some would argue that council member Lee should
be doing time. Yeah, just like you know, know Mitch
Farrell did, just like you know, they pulled Ridley Thomas
(29:21):
off the council. Yeah, and he before he was convicted
of anything. Now he's convicted and he's waiting appeal. Do
we know what's happening with that?
Speaker 2 (29:31):
Yeah, I mean my understanding is that he's still waiting
the appeal.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
I'd have to why do some cases take one hundred
years and some happen so quick? I mean, I've never
understood that question. Don't you know that there's no logical.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
If I knew the answer to that, then I would
let you know. I mean, I can tell you and
you'd be a very rich lawyer. I mean, oftentimes it
boils down to, you know, sometimes let's say that there's
an impending trial. Maybe the witness are not ready yet,
you know, so it has to be continued by When
I say continue, that means postponed. It has to be
(30:05):
you know, continued or postponed because you know, the witnesses
are not ready yet, or it has to be postponed
because maybe not all of the discovery has been you know, completed.
Now all the evidence has been compiled, and so you know,
there's just extensions that the court will give when the
lawyers asked.
Speaker 1 (30:23):
For it, and that can delay a case. Sometimes it
seems like it just takes them forever to even start
the case at all.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
Right, Sometimes, I mean, you know, depositions need to be
had that haven't been taken yet, you know, and so
the lawyer is going to say, your honor, I need
an extra three months here.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Wow. Okay. So the point I was making is that
I don't think there's equal accountability. Same thing we're seeing,
you know, them going after council member current Price, what
I think is BS and then Hawkman who applied that
it was BS two to many black leaders. Once he
got elected, he was singing a different tune and is
(31:06):
now brought additional charges against Council number Price, who is
turned out. Yes he is and is stepping and will
be stepping aside next year. Yes, but they're still pursuing
these charges. And that was also continued, right.
Speaker 2 (31:22):
Yes, that was continued to January twentieth.
Speaker 1 (31:26):
So what happens on January twenty we'll find out, I mean,
what's going to happen.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
We'll see if the lawyers and the witnesses and all
of them people are ready, and if they are ready,
then it'll probably go forward on January twentieth. If they're not,
then you know, it'll be continued again. There will come
a point though, where the judge would be like, okay,
like no more continuous, is no more postpondence of this thing.
Let's get this thing moving.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
So that's up to the judge, up to the judge.
At this rate, by the time they go to court,
a council member's term may be over.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
Yes, that's true. I do foresee that the preliminary hearing
will happen before he's turned out.
Speaker 1 (32:10):
I just feel like, well, and I know I'm not
the only one because we've talked about this on the
show before, but it feels like a targeting of black
electeds in LA and it always has. It's not new. Yeah,
I've seen it for I've been on this mic a
lot of years, Chris, and I've seen it for years
that we're the only ones that seem to be caught
(32:32):
up in things that other people would be let you know, okay,
pay this off. Yeah, you know, pay off, pay a fine,
you know, get a slap on the wrist. We got
to have they could settle. That's also still a possibility, right, Ah.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
Yes, and probably likely. I think Karen probably does go
down on something. He probably will accept some type.
Speaker 1 (32:52):
Of you think he's going to plead out.
Speaker 2 (32:53):
I think he probably will. I don't think it goes
to a full you know, a trial with a you know,
a guilty or not guilty verse there.
Speaker 3 (33:02):
You know.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
So that's that's what I think is going to happen there.
But that's just my opinion.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
Yeah, Well, of course.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
Most cases, most cases don't go to trial, you know,
most cases do end up in some type of you know,
settlement or plea deal. I predict that it would be
a you know, just a lesser you know, offense than
what he's charged with now. But you know, that's what
I think it happened.
Speaker 1 (33:25):
That's why I thought it was so crazy that that
sheriff's deputy got Trevor Kirk in the the windc case
where that he threw that older American black woman to
the ground and you know punched or and stuff. Yeah,
he was he didn't take the deal. He was convicted,
facing jail time, and then the Trump administration offers him
(33:49):
a post conviction plea deal. And I'm wondering, why would
anyone ever take a plea deal if you can get
a post conviction plea deal.
Speaker 2 (33:57):
Right, that's a great question. But what I'll I add
this though, because something that we're talking about really dig
it's on my mind. You know, Black leaders often do
not get away with the things that white leaders and
(34:17):
other leaders may get away with. But I still think
that it's incumbent upon us to make sure that we
walk with integrity. We are held to a higher standard
than other people. But it's and it's not fair, but
we still got to do we still got to walk
in integrity, and that's what's super important, even at the
city council level.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
Yeah, well, yeah, I mean I think that's fair to say.
I'm not saying that because you know, we're being bothered
and discriminated against, that we get a pass. But I
do think that it's a problem when you think you're
walking integrity and you make an error. You know, whether
it's an administrative error or something that's commonly done in
(34:59):
the council, like an up down vote right on a
massive on a bunch of different things, they vote up down.
It's not even controversial. You may or may not even
realize your wife is doing business and where someone else
would get a handshake and a clap on the back.
And you know this is an ethics issue. Let's not
let's be more careful. Yours is going to be take
(35:21):
down your reputation, possible jail time. You got to spend
a bunch of money defending it, even if you win,
and it even if you win, the genie doesn't go
back in the bottle. You're the guy that was accused
of this, this, this, and this.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
Yeah, the character is assassinated that point. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
Attorney Chris Martin is my guest. You're welcome to call
in at eight hundred and nine two oh fifteen eighty
or not KBLA Talk fifteen eighty. Welcome back. Indeed, we
are here with Attorney Chris Martin, and i'd have to
keep you here until next Tuesday if I was going
to ask you all the legal tangling questions and issues
that I So let's go right to Jerry on the phone.
(36:02):
Jerry from LA, good morning, you're on with Attorney Chris Martin.
Speaker 4 (36:07):
Good morning, good morning Domin. I thank you for taking
my call, and Attorney Martin, thank you for for coming on.
I had just a couple of questions, and I'll pick
my answers off the air, but I wanted to get
your thoughts on how things like post conviction plea deals
and qualified immunity, how those things would impact the average
(36:31):
citizens' rights for equal protection under the law.
Speaker 3 (36:35):
It seems as though we have enough data and awareness
to where we understand the effects that these things have
had on the people, And I was wondering, at what
point does all this stuff violate our individual civil rights
for equal protection.
Speaker 4 (36:56):
That was kind of what I wanted to get your
thoughts on. I'll take yours here.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
Yeah. Absolutely. So the first thing is that when it
comes to qualified immunity, that's just something that you know,
solely benefits law enforcement officers, gives them a huge advantage
in civil rights lawsuits against them for excessive force and
police brutality. What it essentially says is, you know, if
(37:25):
there's no case law that is identical to the facts
in your case, then that officer is going to be
immune from being sued even if they have violated your
constitutional rights.
Speaker 1 (37:46):
So I thought that applied to all like agents of
the state.
Speaker 2 (37:51):
Yes, yes, but particularly you know, as it pertains to
you know, I do, you know, think about it more
so as it pertains to because you're dealing with exactly
rights attorney.
Speaker 1 (38:03):
And so yeah, so how then, I mean, it's I
don't know, I'm not a lawyer, but Jerry, it sounds
like Jerry's saying, because we're not going to get the
post conviction plea deal and we're not going to get
qualified immunity as regular citizens, does that mean we're not
getting equal protection under.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
The law, I would say so, I mean it exactly,
we can't get qualified immunity for our actions, right, Right,
we violate somebody's constitutional rights. You know, were going to
jail for it, or we could be sued for it.
Speaker 1 (38:35):
Right.
Speaker 2 (38:36):
But you know, if a cop violates your constitutional rights,
then you know there's a whole bunch of protections that
are in play for them that allow them to do
that to a certain extent.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
So apparently there's exceptions to equal protection, yes, and essentially
essentially living while black, right.
Speaker 2 (38:55):
Like, essentially, if an officer doesn't isn't put on notice
that what they're doing is constitutional, then they can get
away with it in civil rights court.
Speaker 1 (39:04):
You know, but if you have to already have a
precedent then they if they as long as they're coming
up with a unique way to violate your civil rights,
they're in the clear.
Speaker 2 (39:13):
Exactly.
Speaker 1 (39:15):
I wasn't kneeling on his neck. I was stomping on
his neck.
Speaker 2 (39:18):
Right exactly. And if there is no case out there
that says that stomping on a person's neck is unconstitutional,
then yes they can get away with you know.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
So, how do you ever get a new case into
the law.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
Then that is a great question.
Speaker 1 (39:32):
That's a chicken or egg law, exactly.
Speaker 2 (39:35):
That's a chicken or egg law. Right. So it does
take a brave judge, you know, it takes a brave
judge to be able to say, you know what, I
deemed this to be constitutional, I mean constitutional going forward,
you know, and then the civil rights lawyers can look
at that case and say, all.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
Right, so they have to make they have to decide
that something else is close enough to something else while
stomping kneelings same difference, it can go. And that's a
total discretion of the judge. Yes, that's crazy. And so
most of those cases are old, right because they would
have had to be introduced before qualified immunity was so
(40:16):
wide widely used.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Yeah, So there are some you know, old cases that
we can refer to, but there's also you know, newer
cases that come out that we can you know, refer
to as well and try to just make them be
as similar to those previous cases as we possibly can.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
That's so insane, so great question, Jerry. And the answer
is no, you don't have equal protection under the law.
I mean pretty much. I mean except for in this
this this this redefined print. There's more terms and conditions
than an app. We got a minute and a half here,
Attorney Chris Martin, time flies when you're on the radio.
(40:52):
What do you want to leave us with today?
Speaker 2 (40:55):
I want to leave you with the fact that I'm
running a city council and in DISH nine. So vote
for your boy. Follow me on Instagram at Chris Martin
CD nine, visit my website at www dot Chris Martin
f O R C D nine dot com. And I
love y'all. I love my community and I'm proud to
(41:16):
be having the opportunity to represent it. I'm from south
central Los Angeles. I never left the community, and I
love my community with all my heart. Thank you.
Speaker 1 (41:26):
And but okay, we still got a little close to
a minute. That's all costs a lot of money to
run for city office in LA. Doesn't it meant to
be on the hunt? You on the hunt?
Speaker 2 (41:38):
Oh yeah, I'll be making my phone calls, you know,
and all of that. You know. So it's hard, but
there's nothing that is impossible. And I believe in myself
and my abilities and my God, and I know that
I can do this.
Speaker 1 (41:51):
Okay. Well, you know, I'm always happy to see people
jumping in the race, progressive jumping in the race. I
think that for me that would be a turrent, But
I'm glad it's not for you, because that that's one
of the big problems with our government right now. It's
too dependent on who has deep pocket pockets. If it
was billionaire attorney Chris Martin, you would have actually quantifiably
(42:15):
an easier ride. But you know, organizing skills and tenacity,
as we've seen with folks like Hugo so to Martinez
and you see San Nantis can go a long way.
Thank you so much for stopping by.
Speaker 2 (42:29):
Thank you all right.
Speaker 1 (42:31):
Wealth Building Wednesday next on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty
Hey to La Talk fifteen eighty Good morning, good morning,
good morning, and God bless I'm Dominique Deprima this show
it's called First Things First and my first thing today
and every day is given Thanksgiving, praises, just prayer given
Thanksgiving praises, asking for blessings from the Most High, asking
for the blessings of the ancestors and the elders. And
(00:20):
let's go good. A lot going on and it's all
stuff you want to be here for. It's a it's
a big, big day around here. That what they used
to say. Anyway, I'm happy to be here. I'm happy
you're here. It is a wealth building Wednesday, and this
is how things go down on a wealth building Wednesday.
(00:41):
Our one we look local. Start the top of the
second hour with a wealth Building Wednesday Spotlight, where we
will highlight a business or an opportunity for businesses that
are either innovative, black owned, they're local and small, which
is also important to support and or socially in a
So all that is going on, then our three we
(01:04):
are going to be talking about AI and technology for
your kids, the toys, all the x mis kwansa stuff
as well as for you okay, looking forward to that
conversation with Jamiica Marshall. So right now in studio, I
think I used to call them partner in politics. Here
to give his take on that. In the third he's
(01:26):
a lawyer or community organizer, a singer, and a songwriter
who grew up in South LA. South central is what
it says. Are you one of the ones? I'll ask
him once he gets on the mike. He went to
UC Santa Barbara, graduated in English and history, and he's
got his law degree from Hastings College of Law and
(01:47):
he served there as co president of the Black Law
Students Association. Attorney Chris Martin, good morning, Good morning man.
You know what I feel like, Well you probably know
better than I do, being a musician, but it seems
like LA is having a little renaissance right now. Maybe
we've been having it, I think for a while, but
(02:09):
I feel like it's picking up with live music. Yes,
I mean the live music performance venues and the bands
and the people, the fans that come out and appreciate it. It's
really robust.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
I think absolutely. It's a beautiful thing to see that
folks still want to, you know, or take in live music.
You know, as a musician myself. You know, I just
performed on this past Sunday in Long Beach, you know,
so how was that?
Speaker 1 (02:37):
It was good? It was good good, Yeah, because the
people are here for it. I feel like the more
stressed out we get with national politics and local politics,
the more we want to go see live music.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Absolutely. I mean it's something too, you know. It just
kind of just kindly distract us from you know, what's
going on in the world just for a minute, you know,
and that's a beautiful thing.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Yeah, And I think it also inspires creative courage and
you know, courage in other parts of life. Like, okay,
am I going to be outspoken? I'm feeling real, real inspired.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
You know.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
I went to see Terrace Martin last night, and I mean,
you know, I'm a huge fan of his, but it
was just off the hook and what I left about
it seemed like most of the crowd was millennial and
younger and out to see jazz and just having a
great time. And of course the band sounded amazing. So yeah,
(03:34):
I'm all in ten today. Chris absolutely intent and you know,
I love also with terrorists. You know, it's just like
fifteen hundred or nothing of some of these other groups.
It's a lot of it is local talent.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Yeah, absolutely, there's a lot of local talent out here
in LA and in South Central and you know where
I come from, A forty third and Central Avenue, shout
out to the east Side. You know.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
Of course, I think that's true and also really underrated
because when we think of LA, we think of movie
stars and money and people on the beach. That's what
people well, that's what people. I'm from the Bay, so
that's what people think of LA when they think of here.
What part of the bear Are you from San Francisco. Yeah,
but you know, LA has adopted me, and I'm honored
(04:24):
to be adopted here. But it's both scholars like the
African afrocentric scholars like Asha Quasi and Renoco Rashidi and
doctor Tony Humbert from Southern California, from South Central and
then you know, you've got your Kemasi Washington's, You're you know,
Terrace Martin's, you know, Alex Eisley's just all these folks
(04:49):
that are from here. It's it's a real blessing.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
I think it is. It is. I mean, LA has
so much talent and there's more to come.
Speaker 1 (04:59):
For sure that we're where can we see you performing?
I mean, you're so busy, right, you're rumor? Has it?
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Well?
Speaker 1 (05:07):
I think we announced on this show you're running for office. Yes,
you have a private law practice which is booming, and
you have a band.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
Yes, and it's no longer a rumor. All the paperwork
is fout. I'm officially a candidate for Los Angeles City
Council District nine.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Wow. When was the deadline? It just passed?
Speaker 3 (05:27):
Right?
Speaker 2 (05:29):
I believe the deadline where it hasn't passed it is
in February.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Okay, leave it to you to be ahead of the deadline. Yeah,
So by that means we'll be in full swing with
election in February because a lot of people talk to talk.
But it's more than a notion, right, you need a
fair number of verified signatures, yes, and a fee?
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Yes? Right, Yes, you need five hundred signatures and a
three hundred dollars fee, or if you get a thousand
and signatures, you don't have to pay the.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
Three really yeah, but that's really more like two or
three thousand signatures because they have to be verified, right.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
They have to be verified voters in the district registered,
you know, all.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
Of that, which is harder than it sounds.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
It's harder than it sounds, but uh, it's possible. It's doable.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
And we think like, oh, I just get my mom
in them and wait eleven twelve, right, get up to
one thousand. Well, that's interesting that that'll be an interesting race.
I think next year is going to be a lot
for the City of Los Angeles. We've got mayor. Yeah,
we've got governor's race, a couple city city councils. It's
(06:42):
odd number districts, right, right, I think it's yeah, all
the odd number districts, so weird. We we alternate, that's true,
between the odd and even. And do you know, do
you know who you're supporting for governor yet? I don't.
I haven't decided. And it seems like, I, yes, we
should wait until after the deadline, right, because it seems
(07:03):
like a lot of people are running.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
For a lot of people are running, you know. I
mean I have been seeing viragos ad a lot of
the you know, the black political events, so I do
see that he's you know, working to you.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
Know, he's doing his thing. Yeah. Well, I mean, look,
he's been mayor of Los Angeles. He knows without us
is not going down, right, Yeah, at least not for
not for any candidate of color. Right, you ain't gonna
be it's crazy. You're not going to be a black
mayor without Latinos and you're not gonna be Latino mayor
without black people not in LA.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
Absolutely, Absolutely, that black vote and that Latino vote is
super important.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
Yeah, but there's a distinct possibility And I maybe talked
about this too much, but I don't think enough that
we could have two Republicans in the in the guminatorial primary,
because right now, the two Republicans are in the top three,
and we don't we have we we don't have you know,
(08:03):
the type of primary where you get one Republican and
one Democrat, you get the top two vote getters. They
could both be Nazi Party, right, they have to pick.
Speaker 2 (08:12):
Its important to get there and vote. Yeah, you don't vote,
then you don't count.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
Yeah. Well, and you can say that because you didn't
just start saying it. You you've been an activist a
long time. It's not just oh, I'm running for office
and now I'm going.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
To say vote right, Absolutely, yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
I mean, and you're a real like you're an actual activist,
like the type that goes to protests and you know,
not just a keyboard warrior.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Well, thank you, I appreciate that. Yeah, it's an honor
to serve my community, something my mom instilled to me
in a young age, you know, and it's working.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Yeah. So we're getting breaking news right now that Warner
Brothers has rejected this deal from param the hostel bid
from Paramount, and they're saying that the Ellison family, which
is you know, Larry Ellison and David Ellison father's son.
Larry Ellison, of course, is the guy behind Oracle. He's
(09:12):
one of the Trump billionaire broligarchs, and he is soon
to be in control of TikTok if that deal goes through.
They had been beaten out by Netflix and now they
did a hostile offer and apparently it's been rejected. Now.
(09:32):
I don't know how enough about this kind of business deals.
I you know, this is a bit above my pay grade.
But my understanding was that the President was going to
put his finger on the scale and try to help
his friend Larry Ellison because partly because he has agreed
to fire a couple of CNN host if he gets
(09:53):
hold of it. How would that work? Could the president
step in? And I mean he can't force the board
to take the deal, Kenny, How's that?
Speaker 2 (10:00):
It seems highly unethical. But with a president like this,
that's what he does. You know, he's an unethical president,
you know, And even if he doesn't do it on
an official level, I mean, of course, you know, he
can go behind the scenes and try to influence things,
you know, Right, That's that's who he is as a
as a person.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
Unfortunately, Wow, well I'm surprised. Miles and I were talking
about this because he plays that lottery i'll call the
stock market. And Paramont said it was going to pay
Warner stockholders thirty bucks a share. Miles thought that was
a pretty tempting offer, but seventy eight billion for the
whole company. But there they said no, and their take
(10:43):
in they're saying no comment, which I think it's hilarious.
No and no comment. No no from Warners and no
comment from Paramount. So it looks like, I don't know,
I guess we'll see what Trump doesn't.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
You're going to see.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
We'll see what the unethical move we never thought of.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Was, right, I mean, And every day it's something new
with him, isn't it.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
Yeah, it's the art of the deal.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Chris, Oh my gosh. You just wonder what the next
day is going to bring with him.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
I mean from a legal mind, are you are you surprised,
like the moves they're making with the Supreme Court, things
they're going after, like right now, they're going after birthright
citizenship now, which we kind of have looked at I've
always thought pretty basic. Yeah, kind of US policy. Is
that surprising you the scope of it, the depth of it,
(11:29):
or you kind of were expecting this.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
I was expecting this, you know once Trump got in there,
you know he was going to including from the first term,
he was going to pack the Supreme Court with people
for the next thirty years who were going to be
in line with what he agrees with, you know, which
allows him to do essentially whatever he wants when it
comes to these laws. Right, Like that's why you know
(11:54):
abortion was held to be or Roe v. Wade was overturned,
you know, because he got the the people in there
that he wanted to be able to change that.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
But I feel like every president wanted to have a
permanent majority on the Supreme Court. Yes, but this one
pushed the envelope and did things that were unethical, you know,
didn't let Obama have his pick, and then went ahead
and they went ahead. Well it was really that was
Mitch McConnell. And then they went ahead and jam their
(12:26):
pick through at the last minute. So now they have
this super majority.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Yeah, I mean it's just crazy that, you know, the
stars I hate to say it like this, but the
stars kind of aligned for him to be able to
you know, cheat, to cheat, you know with you know,
one of the long time Supreme Court justices, you know,
Ruth Bedter Ginsburg, you know, dying in office as opposed
to retiring a little bit earlier in the Obama administration,
(12:54):
where he could have replaced her with, you know, somebody
for the next thirty years who would have been more
in line with liberal and progressive politics. She stayed on
and then passed away, you know, closer to Trump's term,
which allowed him to replace her with a conservative.
Speaker 1 (13:12):
Yeah, that's that. I mean a lot of people are
still angry at her about that. It's like Hubris, you
think you can beat the clock, You think you can
beat Father time. Yeah, I doubt it.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
I think a lot of folks just underestimated his ability
to beat Hillary, you know.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, right to happen. You know, well,
because it seemed like he was like a cartoon character. Yeah,
and he still seems like that.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Yes, he does, and he've been on a grander level now.
You know, he believes that he can operate with impunity.
As Richard Nixon once said, when the president does it,
that means that it is not illegal.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
Okay, more on that when we come forward, Dirney, Chris Martin.
It's my guest, and you're listening to KBLA Top fifteen eighty.
Right now, we're back to me. We're back to attorney
Chris Martin, and you know, I appreciate your giving your
legal expertise on all these different issues that we're facing.
I feel like I should be keeping of running tally
because there's so many stories where I find myself saying, man,
(14:14):
is that legal or what are the legal ramifications for that?
So today a lot of people are talking about Rob
Reiner and his wife Michelle being murdered allegedly by their son,
Nick Reiner, and he's meant to appear in court today
on two counts of first degree murder for killing his parents.
(14:38):
I can't really think of much more tragic than that.
Does any of the legal stuff change because they're related,
And we just saw the similar story with the opera
singer in Santa Monica whose son allegedly stabbed him to death.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
First of all, my heart goes out to that family. Yeah,
you know, I believe that, you know, that's just a
super tragic situation. And when it comes to, you know,
there's the legal aspects of it, when you're talking about family,
I believe that there's a good chance that the defense
(15:21):
attorney is probably going to argue that that the killing
should be downgraded from first degree murder to you know,
second degree murder or you know, voluntary manslaughter or something
like that due to you know, mitigating factors.
Speaker 1 (15:37):
Because he's struggling with drug abuse and or mental health.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Mental health exactly. There may even be an insanity plea.
I'm sure that there would be some type of insanity
plea from the defense attorney related to that, as.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
They're saying that he's hired this really you know, top
level attorney and Jackson defense attorney, and that seems weird
because I'm sure his parents are paying for it his inheritance.
If you murder your parents and their will says that
(16:14):
you are the inheritor, you still get everything.
Speaker 2 (16:18):
It doesn't quite work like that when you when you're
the person who actually kills them, you know. But yeah,
I mean i'd imagine that, you know, what he has
is because of his parents in some way, shape or form.
Speaker 1 (16:33):
Yeah, I mean, just you know, we can all make
our own way. But when you're in and out of rehab,
you know, and you're having mental health issues, you probably
are more than likely living on your parents. So, you know,
the district attorney had a big press conference yesterday and
he is they're holding him without bail. He could be
(16:56):
looking at life without possibility of parole or even the
death penalty, which are our DA has brought back.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
Yes, he has.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
What does that mean that Da Hawkman has brought back
the death penalty? I mean, in real people terms, what
does it mean?
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Well, it certainly means that for various crimes that are
you know, deemed to be heinous, like a first degree
murder of you know, uh, too well respected and beloved uh,
you know, people in the community, that the death penalty
is going to be more likely to happen in a
(17:33):
situation like that, and that's something that's that's that's going
to be on the table there. I mean, I'm not
somebody who I don't personally believe in the death penalty,
but I know that there's a lot of folks out
there who do believe in there are retribution aspects of
our criminal justice system as it pertainers to that.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
Yeah, you know, I don't believe in the death penalty
at all. If if there was, I don't believe that
anyone gets to decide who lives and dies ever, Like,
I just think that's between you and the most high.
But the racism factor, even if I did think the
state had the right to execute because of the racial
bias in the system, I just I don't know how
(18:14):
you can support killing people when everything in our system
is biased against black people.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
You really can't. Because this is like ultimately the death Once,
when somebody's put to death, you know, you can't take
that back. What if there's exculpatory evidence that is found.
You know, people sit on death row for years and years,
you know, and so it's just like, what if there's
exculpatory evidence that is found that could exonerate that person,
(18:43):
you know, but they're killed you know, you can't take
that back. And that has happened countless times.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
And I would imagine I have not seen the data
on this, but I would imagine just from clocking the
news stories of who's getting off death row, they always
seem to be black men.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
Yeah. Absolutely. You know there's a case by the name
of Supreme Court case by the name of McCleskey v. Kemp,
where you know, it proved that people who kill white
victims are far more likely to get the death penalty
than people who kill black victims. Right. It stands for
(19:20):
the notion that when it comes to victims of violence
that ultimately black lives don't matter as much as white lives. Wow,
And so you know there's a bias there as it
pertains of the death penalty that needs to be looked at.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
Yeah, and well, and we know we're much more likely
to get sentenced for any crime to the death penalty
that that I have seen data on compared to anyone else.
So for me, even if I didn't have a moral
problem with someone else deciding who lives and dies, the
fact that that bias is there means it nullifies to me.
(20:00):
It nullifies any moral authority to have such a law. Yeah,
because it's not being applied equally. We got news traffic
in sports right here. Then we're going to continue the
conversation with Attorney Chris Martin on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty. Okay,
So the La City Council on Friday voted they approved
a million dollars for new LAPD recruits for the months
(20:21):
of January and February. Matt Zabo, who does budget and finance,
he's a city administrative officer. He said that they need
an twenty four million in additional dollars for next year
to hire officers. And we are in the middle of
(20:41):
a crazy budget crisis where the mayor had to jump
through hoops and get unions to agree to compromise us
and such in order to avoid any layoffs. She was
able to avoid that. Shout out to the mayor for that.
But now you're telling us out of your neck you
can suddenly find a million dollars now. According to ABC seven,
(21:05):
Marquise Harris Dawson had the hut John Lee Tracy Bark
and they mailed up by the all voted against that million.
They're saying the ABC seven is saying it's because they're
supporting more money, a proposal for four point four million
that was made by by council member Lee.
Speaker 2 (21:24):
Thoughts that is just ridiculous. You know, I don't think
that we need to expand the budget at all for police.
You know, I just wish that even if a fraction
of the money that police get was just spent on
things that will help our community, then now make a
huge difference in our community. That's what I think about it.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
Yeah, it's it's problematic. I mean we I don't understand
how you either have the money or you don't. Because
as the public, I'm gonna stop believing you when you
tell we're broke if you can suddenly pull four point
four million, which is really an annualized twenty four million,
right out of your neck.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
Yeah, absolutely, but you I mean it.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
It doesn't look good. And I'm baffled. Yeah, I'm really baffled.
I'm just surprised. You know, John Lee more or less
a Republican. H Tracy Park more or less a Republican.
By the eye don't know as much about Yeah, our
city council president is a progressive.
Speaker 2 (22:30):
Yeah, yes, he is supposed to be right.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
Yeah, I mean that's a lot of money, twenty four
million dollars. I mean, it sounded bad at four point four,
but we're talking about a time when, according to you know,
Katie Orroslovsky, it's not money that we can make up
by laying off city workers. It's money that will be
part of a structural deficit moving forward.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Yeah, it's just I mean, it's really shame about it.
I don't think that the police need more of a
budget than they already have. They already take up so
much of the city's budget, and if even just a
fraction of that was spent on, you know, things like
making sure that we can get more homeowners in the
ninth District, or you know, we can get more job
(23:17):
training programs in the in the ninth District, or in
the city of Los Angeles in general. I speak about
the ninth District because that's where I was, that's where
I lived, born and raised, and that's where I'm running
running for. But ultimately, if we can spend that money
on the things that actually matter will help our community,
that is what will reduce crime.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
Here's the thing. There's two things about this, Attorney Martin. One,
can we find the money, you know, for other things
we need, you know, like you just said, like houselessness
for example. Okay, that's one thing. The other thing is
if this isn't happening in an election year when people
(23:56):
are vying for the support of the police association, and
that really seems a little suspect. Oh, suddenly we have
to cough up money. It's like somebody's twisting your arm,
you know. Oh look at the timing. Yeah, twenty twenty six.
We have city council races, we have the mayor's race,
we have the governor's race, and suddenly, from out of nowhere,
(24:19):
we find money for the police. Yeah, that is fishy
to me.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Yeah, I mean the money is there to be able
to make a difference in the community, but we have
to push our leaders to use that money for the
right things. We have to push them because somebody else
over there is pushing them to use it for the police.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Well. And the thing about it is if it instantly
made us safe, I think that would be different. But
you know, okay, fine, for everybody, there'll be nobody will
be attacked, there'll be no hate crimes. Suddenly we'll have
no robberies homicides. But that's not how it works.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
It's not how it works at all.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
And so what are we paying for? And I don't know,
I would feel a lot more comfortable with this if
the LA Police Association was not allowed to make donations
two campaigns for one thing.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
Absolutely, absolutely, And we really need to reassess the city's budget.
That's one of the things that I stand on.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
We need to reassess the city's But what does that
mean though, I mean, that's easy to say fix it,
do it better. I mean what do you mean by that?
Reassess and do what.
Speaker 2 (25:35):
Well? Looking at the people's budget for example, you know,
thinking about the things that are like police, like law enforcement,
right where you got so much of the city's budget
being spent on that to the exclusion of other programs
that could actually you know, diminish crime in our city.
(25:56):
But we're not spending it on those things, which actually
is the things that the folks need in order to
not do crime, you know. So we can reassess the
city's budget. We can take it from you know, the
overspending on law enforcement and the militarization of our police,
and we can take that and use it towards the
things that will help our community.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
Yeah, I mean I think that, you know, I've been
part of the last couple of years presenting the people's budget,
last three years, I think. And the thing about it,
one thing it consistently shows, and it is thousands of
people that take this survey, is that people want to
spend less on police. It also less on parking enforcements surprice, right,
(26:40):
And we want to spend more on libraries, parks, jobs,
and mental health services. And that's consistent.
Speaker 2 (26:50):
Yeah, and spend spending more on giving our young folks
something to do so that they're not just feeling like
game banging is the only thing they can do.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
You know, Yeah, for sure that But it's I mean,
I'm reading about this and I'm thinking of the council
members that we have. I called out the council president
because they said he wants even more money. But that
means according to this count nine to six, that means
Hugoso too, Martinez, Alnissa Sernandez, you know, Nithjo Rahman. That
(27:26):
means a lot of people that we consider progressive. Just
Isabel Horado, Yeah, just voted for an election year bonus.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Yeah, yeah, I mean they're taking our votes for granted.
They think they already got it. You know. So it's
like they may feel like it doesn't even matter what
they do that offends the people, you know, because the
police are going to give them all his money.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
I mean if well, so two things, police association gets
dues from cops. So I guess recruiting twenty four million
worth of cops would give them more dues. And then
can they turn around and spend that money to support
whatever candidate they want? So they strong arm the money
out of the city council and then turn around and
(28:15):
use it to either support or undermine all of those
folks who voted or all the odd odd numbered council
members who voted for it. It's very fishy. Police associations
should not be allowed to donate to city politics. I
just don't think they should. You're supposed to be protecting
(28:37):
and serving everybody, absolutely and certainly not in election years
on any budget items concerning cops. The wholes all the
odd number years have to recuse themselves if they're running
for office.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
Okay, we got to hold our leaders accountable.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
And so we were talking about this off the mic
that accountability does is not equal opportunity though right, yes,
I mean some would argue that council member Lee should
be doing time. Yeah, just like you know, know Mitch
Farrell did, just like you know, they pulled Ridley Thomas
(29:21):
off the council. Yeah, and he before he was convicted
of anything. Now he's convicted and he's waiting appeal. Do
we know what's happening with that?
Speaker 2 (29:31):
Yeah, I mean my understanding is that he's still waiting
the appeal.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
I'd have to why do some cases take one hundred
years and some happen so quick? I mean, I've never
understood that question. Don't you know that there's no logical.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
If I knew the answer to that, then I would
let you know. I mean, I can tell you and
you'd be a very rich lawyer. I mean, oftentimes it
boils down to, you know, sometimes let's say that there's
an impending trial. Maybe the witness are not ready yet,
you know, so it has to be continued by When
I say continue, that means postponed. It has to be
(30:05):
you know, continued or postponed because you know, the witnesses
are not ready yet, or it has to be postponed
because maybe not all of the discovery has been you know, completed.
Now all the evidence has been compiled, and so you know,
there's just extensions that the court will give when the
lawyers asked.
Speaker 1 (30:23):
For it, and that can delay a case. Sometimes it
seems like it just takes them forever to even start
the case at all.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
Right, Sometimes, I mean, you know, depositions need to be
had that haven't been taken yet, you know, and so
the lawyer is going to say, your honor, I need
an extra three months here.
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Wow. Okay. So the point I was making is that
I don't think there's equal accountability. Same thing we're seeing,
you know, them going after council member current Price, what
I think is BS and then Hawkman who applied that
it was BS two to many black leaders. Once he
got elected, he was singing a different tune and is
(31:06):
now brought additional charges against Council number Price, who is
turned out. Yes he is and is stepping and will
be stepping aside next year. Yes, but they're still pursuing
these charges. And that was also continued, right.
Speaker 2 (31:22):
Yes, that was continued to January twentieth.
Speaker 1 (31:26):
So what happens on January twenty we'll find out, I mean,
what's going to happen.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
We'll see if the lawyers and the witnesses and all
of them people are ready, and if they are ready,
then it'll probably go forward on January twentieth. If they're not,
then you know, it'll be continued again. There will come
a point though, where the judge would be like, okay,
like no more continuous, is no more postpondence of this thing.
Let's get this thing moving.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
So that's up to the judge, up to the judge.
At this rate, by the time they go to court,
a council member's term may be over.
Speaker 2 (32:02):
Yes, that's true. I do foresee that the preliminary hearing
will happen before he's turned out.
Speaker 1 (32:10):
I just feel like, well, and I know I'm not
the only one because we've talked about this on the
show before, but it feels like a targeting of black
electeds in LA and it always has. It's not new. Yeah,
I've seen it for I've been on this mic a
lot of years, Chris, and I've seen it for years
that we're the only ones that seem to be caught
(32:32):
up in things that other people would be let you know, okay,
pay this off. Yeah, you know, pay off, pay a fine,
you know, get a slap on the wrist. We got
to have they could settle. That's also still a possibility, right, Ah.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
Yes, and probably likely. I think Karen probably does go
down on something. He probably will accept some type.
Speaker 1 (32:52):
Of you think he's going to plead out.
Speaker 2 (32:53):
I think he probably will. I don't think it goes
to a full you know, a trial with a you know,
a guilty or not guilty verse there.
Speaker 3 (33:02):
You know.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
So that's that's what I think is going to happen there.
But that's just my opinion.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
Yeah, Well, of course.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
Most cases, most cases don't go to trial, you know,
most cases do end up in some type of you know,
settlement or plea deal. I predict that it would be
a you know, just a lesser you know, offense than
what he's charged with now. But you know, that's what
I think it happened.
Speaker 1 (33:25):
That's why I thought it was so crazy that that
sheriff's deputy got Trevor Kirk in the the windc case
where that he threw that older American black woman to
the ground and you know punched or and stuff. Yeah,
he was he didn't take the deal. He was convicted,
facing jail time, and then the Trump administration offers him
(33:49):
a post conviction plea deal. And I'm wondering, why would
anyone ever take a plea deal if you can get
a post conviction plea deal.
Speaker 2 (33:57):
Right, that's a great question. But what I'll I add
this though, because something that we're talking about really dig
it's on my mind. You know, Black leaders often do
not get away with the things that white leaders and
(34:17):
other leaders may get away with. But I still think
that it's incumbent upon us to make sure that we
walk with integrity. We are held to a higher standard
than other people. But it's and it's not fair, but
we still got to do we still got to walk
in integrity, and that's what's super important, even at the
city council level.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
Yeah, well, yeah, I mean I think that's fair to say.
I'm not saying that because you know, we're being bothered
and discriminated against, that we get a pass. But I
do think that it's a problem when you think you're
walking integrity and you make an error. You know, whether
it's an administrative error or something that's commonly done in
(34:59):
the council, like an up down vote right on a
massive on a bunch of different things, they vote up down.
It's not even controversial. You may or may not even
realize your wife is doing business and where someone else
would get a handshake and a clap on the back.
And you know this is an ethics issue. Let's not
let's be more careful. Yours is going to be take
(35:21):
down your reputation, possible jail time. You got to spend
a bunch of money defending it, even if you win,
and it even if you win, the genie doesn't go
back in the bottle. You're the guy that was accused
of this, this, this, and this.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
Yeah, the character is assassinated that point. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
Attorney Chris Martin is my guest. You're welcome to call
in at eight hundred and nine two oh fifteen eighty
or not KBLA Talk fifteen eighty. Welcome back. Indeed, we
are here with Attorney Chris Martin, and i'd have to
keep you here until next Tuesday if I was going
to ask you all the legal tangling questions and issues
that I So let's go right to Jerry on the phone.
(36:02):
Jerry from LA, good morning, you're on with Attorney Chris Martin.
Speaker 4 (36:07):
Good morning, good morning Domin. I thank you for taking
my call, and Attorney Martin, thank you for for coming on.
I had just a couple of questions, and I'll pick
my answers off the air, but I wanted to get
your thoughts on how things like post conviction plea deals
and qualified immunity, how those things would impact the average
(36:31):
citizens' rights for equal protection under the law.
Speaker 3 (36:35):
It seems as though we have enough data and awareness
to where we understand the effects that these things have
had on the people, And I was wondering, at what
point does all this stuff violate our individual civil rights
for equal protection.
Speaker 4 (36:56):
That was kind of what I wanted to get your
thoughts on. I'll take yours here.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
Yeah. Absolutely. So the first thing is that when it
comes to qualified immunity, that's just something that you know,
solely benefits law enforcement officers, gives them a huge advantage
in civil rights lawsuits against them for excessive force and
police brutality. What it essentially says is, you know, if
(37:25):
there's no case law that is identical to the facts
in your case, then that officer is going to be
immune from being sued even if they have violated your
constitutional rights.
Speaker 1 (37:46):
So I thought that applied to all like agents of
the state.
Speaker 2 (37:51):
Yes, yes, but particularly you know, as it pertains to
you know, I do, you know, think about it more
so as it pertains to because you're dealing with exactly
rights attorney.
Speaker 1 (38:03):
And so yeah, so how then, I mean, it's I
don't know, I'm not a lawyer, but Jerry, it sounds
like Jerry's saying, because we're not going to get the
post conviction plea deal and we're not going to get
qualified immunity as regular citizens, does that mean we're not
getting equal protection under.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
The law, I would say so, I mean it exactly,
we can't get qualified immunity for our actions, right, Right,
we violate somebody's constitutional rights. You know, were going to
jail for it, or we could be sued for it.
Speaker 1 (38:35):
Right.
Speaker 2 (38:36):
But you know, if a cop violates your constitutional rights,
then you know there's a whole bunch of protections that
are in play for them that allow them to do
that to a certain extent.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
So apparently there's exceptions to equal protection, yes, and essentially
essentially living while black, right.
Speaker 2 (38:55):
Like, essentially, if an officer doesn't isn't put on notice
that what they're doing is constitutional, then they can get
away with it in civil rights court.
Speaker 1 (39:04):
You know, but if you have to already have a
precedent then they if they as long as they're coming
up with a unique way to violate your civil rights,
they're in the clear.
Speaker 2 (39:13):
Exactly.
Speaker 1 (39:15):
I wasn't kneeling on his neck. I was stomping on
his neck.
Speaker 2 (39:18):
Right exactly. And if there is no case out there
that says that stomping on a person's neck is unconstitutional,
then yes they can get away with you know.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
So, how do you ever get a new case into
the law.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
Then that is a great question.
Speaker 1 (39:32):
That's a chicken or egg law, exactly.
Speaker 2 (39:35):
That's a chicken or egg law. Right. So it does
take a brave judge, you know, it takes a brave
judge to be able to say, you know what, I
deemed this to be constitutional, I mean constitutional going forward,
you know, and then the civil rights lawyers can look
at that case and say, all.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
Right, so they have to make they have to decide
that something else is close enough to something else while
stomping kneelings same difference, it can go. And that's a
total discretion of the judge. Yes, that's crazy. And so
most of those cases are old, right because they would
have had to be introduced before qualified immunity was so
(40:16):
wide widely used.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Yeah, So there are some you know, old cases that
we can refer to, but there's also you know, newer
cases that come out that we can you know, refer
to as well and try to just make them be
as similar to those previous cases as we possibly can.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
That's so insane, so great question, Jerry. And the answer
is no, you don't have equal protection under the law.
I mean pretty much. I mean except for in this
this this this redefined print. There's more terms and conditions
than an app. We got a minute and a half here,
Attorney Chris Martin, time flies when you're on the radio.
(40:52):
What do you want to leave us with today?
Speaker 2 (40:55):
I want to leave you with the fact that I'm
running a city council and in DISH nine. So vote
for your boy. Follow me on Instagram at Chris Martin
CD nine, visit my website at www dot Chris Martin
f O R C D nine dot com. And I
love y'all. I love my community and I'm proud to
(41:16):
be having the opportunity to represent it. I'm from south
central Los Angeles. I never left the community, and I
love my community with all my heart. Thank you.
Speaker 1 (41:26):
And but okay, we still got a little close to
a minute. That's all costs a lot of money to
run for city office in LA. Doesn't it meant to
be on the hunt? You on the hunt?
Speaker 2 (41:38):
Oh yeah, I'll be making my phone calls, you know,
and all of that. You know. So it's hard, but
there's nothing that is impossible. And I believe in myself
and my abilities and my God, and I know that
I can do this.
Speaker 1 (41:51):
Okay. Well, you know, I'm always happy to see people
jumping in the race, progressive jumping in the race. I
think that for me that would be a turrent, But
I'm glad it's not for you, because that that's one
of the big problems with our government right now. It's
too dependent on who has deep pocket pockets. If it
was billionaire attorney Chris Martin, you would have actually quantifiably
(42:15):
an easier ride. But you know, organizing skills and tenacity,
as we've seen with folks like Hugo so to Martinez
and you see San Nantis can go a long way.
Thank you so much for stopping by.
Speaker 2 (42:29):
Thank you all right.
Speaker 1 (42:31):
Wealth Building Wednesday next on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Burden
The Burden is a documentary series that takes listeners into the hidden places where justice is done (and undone). It dives deep into the lives of heroes and villains. And it focuses a spotlight on those who triumph even when the odds are against them. Season 5 - The Burden: Death & Deceit in Alliance On April Fools Day 1999, 26-year-old Yvonne Layne was found murdered in her Alliance, Ohio home. David Thorne, her ex-boyfriend and father of one of her children, was instantly a suspect. Another young man admitted to the murder, and David breathed a sigh of relief, until the confessed murderer fingered David; “He paid me to do it.” David was sentenced to life without parole. Two decades later, Pulitzer winner and podcast host, Maggie Freleng (Bone Valley Season 3: Graves County, Wrongful Conviction, Suave) launched a “live” investigation into David's conviction alongside Jason Baldwin (himself wrongfully convicted as a member of the West Memphis Three). Maggie had come to believe that the entire investigation of David was botched by the tiny local police department, or worse, covered up the real killer. Was Maggie correct? Was David’s claim of innocence credible? In Death and Deceit in Alliance, Maggie recounts the case that launched her career, and ultimately, “broke” her.” The results will shock the listener and reduce Maggie to tears and self-doubt. This is not your typical wrongful conviction story. In fact, it turns the genre on its head. It asks the question: What if our champions are foolish? Season 4 - The Burden: Get the Money and Run “Trying to murder my father, this was the thing that put me on the path.” That’s Joe Loya and that path was bank robbery. Bank, bank, bank, bank, bank. In season 4 of The Burden: Get the Money and Run, we hear from Joe who was once the most prolific bank robber in Southern California, and beyond. He used disguises, body doubles, proxies. He leaped over counters, grabbed the money and ran. Even as the FBI was closing in. It was a showdown between a daring bank robber, and a patient FBI agent. Joe was no ordinary bank robber. He was bright, articulate, charismatic, and driven by a dark rage that he summoned up at will. In seven episodes, Joe tells all: the what, the how… and the why. Including why he tried to murder his father. Season 3 - The Burden: Avenger Miriam Lewin is one of Argentina’s leading journalists today. At 19 years old, she was kidnapped off the streets of Buenos Aires for her political activism and thrown into a concentration camp. Thousands of her fellow inmates were executed, tossed alive from a cargo plane into the ocean. Miriam, along with a handful of others, will survive the camp. Then as a journalist, she will wage a decades long campaign to bring her tormentors to justice. Avenger is about one woman’s triumphant battle against unbelievable odds to survive torture, claim justice for the crimes done against her and others like her, and change the future of her country. Season 2 - The Burden: Empire on Blood Empire on Blood is set in the Bronx, NY, in the early 90s, when two young drug dealers ruled an intersection known as “The Corner on Blood.” The boss, Calvin Buari, lived large. He and a protege swore they would build an empire on blood. Then the relationship frayed and the protege accused Calvin of a double homicide which he claimed he didn’t do. But did he? Award-winning journalist Steve Fishman spent seven years to answer that question. This is the story of one man’s last chance to overturn his life sentence. He may prevail, but someone’s gotta pay. The Burden: Empire on Blood is the director’s cut of the true crime classic which reached #1 on the charts when it was first released half a dozen years ago. Season 1 - The Burden In the 1990s, Detective Louis N. Scarcella was legendary. In a city overrun by violent crime, he cracked the toughest cases and put away the worst criminals. “The Hulk” was his nickname. Then the story changed. Scarcella ran into a group of convicted murderers who all say they are innocent. They turned themselves into jailhouse-lawyers and in prison founded a lway firm. When they realized Scarcella helped put many of them away, they set their sights on taking him down. And with the help of a NY Times reporter they have a chance. For years, Scarcella insisted he did nothing wrong. But that’s all he’d say. Until we tracked Scarcella to a sauna in a Russian bathhouse, where he started to talk..and talk and talk. “The guilty have gone free,” he whispered. And then agreed to take us into the belly of the beast. Welcome to The Burden.