Did Mack Thomas snitch in 1974?

[attila]

While browsing through criminal court cases, i stumbled on what seems to me as clear evidence that Mack Thomas, one of most respected crip leaders of all times, snitched on Julius B. and had him arrested and tried for murder.

What's up with this? Is this common knowledge and have i just missed it al this time?



[Crim. No. 27706. Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Four. March 24, 1977.]
In re JULIUS B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. CLARENCE E. CABELL, as Acting Chief Probation Officer, etc., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JULIUS B., Defendant and Appellant

(Opinion by Jefferson (Bernard), J., with Files, P. J., and Kingsley, J., concurring.)

COUNSEL

Richard H. Levin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, Jack R. Winkler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, S. Clark Moore, Assistant Attorney General, Norman H. Sokolow and Howard J. Schwab, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

JEFFERSON (Bernard), J.

In a petition filed by the Probation Department of Los Angeles County, Julius B., a 17-year-old minor, was accused in paragraph I of the murder of Roy Crutchfield, in violation of Penal Code section 187, and in paragraph II of an assault with a deadly weapon upon Kenneth Abrone, in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a). The allegations were denied. During the trial in the juvenile court the petition was amended to add paragraph III, charging that Julius B. had committed an assault with a deadly weapon upon Andre Halloway, in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a).

Paragraphs I and III of the petition were found to be true. Paragraph II was found not to be true. The minor was declared a ward of the juvenile court, pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, and committed to the California Youth Authority. He appeals.

There is little dispute concerning the events which gave rise to the offenses charged. On Sunday, August 18, 1974, at about 9 p.m., a number of teenagers and young men were standing at and around a liquor store parking lot at 42d Place and South Hoover in Los Angeles. Among them were Teddie, Patrick, Andre Halloway, the victim of an assault with a deadly weapon, Joe, Tyrone, Kenny, Terence, Brenice, and the murder victim, Roy Crutchfield.

A dark-colored Chevrolet drove past with several occupants. Some hands came out of the car windows, making the sign of the "Crips," a gang. A bottle or bottles struck the car. It proceeded down the street, slowing down at a corner, and two occupants got out of the car and came [68 Cal. App. 3d 398] running back to the parking lot. The group on the corner was asked by the visitors about the bottles and, also, if anyone present was a member of the "Brims," another gang. One of the occupants from the Chevrolet grabbed the jacket of Joe and asked him what was written on his shirt.

Kenny, Brenice and Roy Crutchfield came walking across the street. Reference was made by the two visitors to the "Crips." Kenny responded that he cared nothing about gangs, and proceeded toward the liquor store. There was laughter.

At this point one of the occupants who had emerged from the Chevrolet pulled a gun from his waistband and fired a shot in the direction of Kenny, who by this time was entering the liquor store. The shot went through the liquor store window. Roy Crutchfield fell to the ground as another shot was fired (or possibly a third). He was fatally wounded, with a bullet in his head.

The Chevrolet automobile had returned, and departed in a northerly direction on Hoover; the two former occupants of the automobile ran off in that direction.

The major dispute at the trial centered around the identity of the assailants. Teddie, Patrick and Andre, none of whom had ever seen the two before, identified the minor, Julius B., as the triggerman, although none of them had been able to identify him by photograph. There were variations in their testimony but it appeared that the taller of the two, who was the one that shot Crutchfield, was nearly six feet tall, a light-skinned Negro youth, wearing a natural hair-do, parted in the middle, a dark jacket and dark pants, probably levis. The shorter youth from the automobile was an older Negro youth with darker skin, short hair, and was wearing khaki pants and a dark jacket. One of the jackets worn was a "bomber" jacket, and had a fur collar.

The minor, Julius, offered the defense of alibi. He claimed that he was at home with his family at the time of the incident. He introduced testimony that, along with Calvin D. and Brigetta M. and a young adult, Mack Thomas, fn. 1 he had been in a dark-colored Chevrolet which belonged to his friend, Calvin, on Friday, August 16, 1974, but that on the following Sunday he had not been in the company of these friends. [68 Cal. App. 3d 399]

The prosecution called investigating officer Richard Knott to the witness stand. Some questions were asked concerning his investigation. Upon cross-examination, defense counsel elicited from the witness that he had received word from an unidentified female informant after the shooting that Brenice could provide some information about the identity of the Crutchfield assailants. The court interrupted at this point with the observation that hearsay was being introduced. However, defense counsel continued to question Knott about what had been told to him, and by whom, about the shooting. The prosecutor made a motion to strike the testimony, on the ground that it was not relevant. The trial court overruled the motion. The prosecution pointed out that at this stage of the trial there had been no testimony from Brenice, and that testimony concerning what he might have told Officer Knott was "premature." Defense counsel was asked to make an offer of proof and indicate relevancy. The reply was: "[Defense counsel]: I am not going to the statements made by Brenice .... I am providing to -- there is two objects of the testimony that I am driving at. [¶] One is the relationship of the money that has been brought up of other witnesses and two is my ongoing 405 motion to the relationship to identification and preliminary foundation that they were independent. [¶] The Court: Well, you go ahead."

Later, during cross-examination by defense counsel, Knott narrated how Brenice and another person had been encountered by him on the street, and had advised him to investigate a certain Mack Thomas (known as "Mad Dog") and his brother Lee, as persons involved in the shooting. Without objection, the witness told how Brenice later identified Mack Thomas, by photograph, as one of the assailants.

Defense counsel continued to cross-examine, eliciting from the police officer, Knott, that Mack Thomas had been arrested in October of 1974, and had given Knott the information which had led to the arrest of the minor, Julius B. "[Defense counsel]: Did Mack Thomas give you information that led you to [minor]? [¶] [Witness Knott]: That is correct."

Later in the trial, defense counsel continued to pursue the matter of Mack Thomas with Knott's partner in the investigation, Officer Richard Ortiz. Ortiz had been present on occasions when Mack Thomas was being interrogated. "[Defense counsel]: What did Mack Thomas tell you about this incident? [¶] [Witness Ortiz]: He stated that he was there in a car when this shooting took place along with Bregetta M ... , Calvin D ... and another individual and he stated that it was Calvin's car that they [68 Cal. App. 3d 400] were in. [¶] The Court: Another individual? Did he name the other individual? [¶] The Witness: No, he did not. He gave us some information about this third individual. He told us that he went to school in Compton and he lived on the same street as Bregetta, but he did not know the address. [¶] [Defense counsel]: Did he know the name of the other individuals? [¶] [The witness]: No, he did not. I believe he mentioned the name, 'Jay,' but that was all. He did not know the particular name. ... [¶] [Defense counsel]: What did he tell you? [¶] [The witness]: He stated that the other guy in the car did the shooting, that he merely was an observer. He did not participate in the shooting himself." (Italics added.)

Later, Ortiz was asked to divulge the contents of a subsequent interview he had with Mack Thomas. "[Defense counsel]: Did you ask him whether he saw Jay do the shooting? [¶] [The witness]: To the best of my recollection, I believe he stated that he had seen what appeared to be gun flashes coming from the hand of this individual he referred to as Jay." (Italics added.)

On redirect examination by the prosecutor, without objection from defense counsel, Ortiz was allowed to relate how Mack Thomas had identified "Jay" as the minor, Julius B., by selecting a photograph of him contained in the Compton High School Yearbook for 1973.

At the time of the examination of Officers Knott and Ortiz by defense counsel, Mack Thomas had not been called as a witness in the case. Defense counsel made a motion to strike the testimony of Ortiz relating the statements made by Mack Thomas on the ground that the officer's testimony about what Thomas had told him was inadmissible because Mack Thomas was "unavailable" as a witness. The motion was denied by the court as follows: "The Court: All I know is, you asked the questions. If there is no objection to them, they come in. That's all."

Mack Thomas was then called as a witness and appeared with his counsel, a deputy public defender. He refused to answer questions posed by defense counsel on the grounds that the answers thereto might incriminate him.

Later, Officer Knott reappeared on the witness stand. He was asked by the prosecutor if Mack Thomas had identified "another individual" at the shooting scene. Defense counsel objected: "[Defense counsel]: I believe there's a possibility of an Aranda problem here. We do have a co-defendant. We have statements of a co-defendant. [¶] The Court: [68 Cal. App. 3d 401] Well, how could there be an Aranda problem when this entire matter was already thoroughly discussed without present objection. As a matter of fact, not without objection, but was brought to the court's attention by the minor's attorney. You can't pick and choose, can you?"

Counsel went on to explain that he had been pursuing the previous line of questioning the officers about statements made by Mack Thomas because of the issue of "probable cause." The trial court replied that no limitation had been imposed upon the evidence which had been elicited. After some colloquy between court and counsel, the court remarked: "It seems obvious, if it were brought in for the truth of the statement, that it would probably have been one of the most unwisest defense choices to ever make ...." (Italics added.)

The trial court explained that he tried to let lawyers do what they felt was strategically best for their clients, without sitting in judgment. After considerable additional argument by the defense and the prosecution, the trial court ruled that the prosecution could now explore anew with Officer Knott information he assertedly had received from Mack Thomas. Knott proceeded, through the words of Thomas, to place the minor, Julius B., unequivocally at the scene of the killing as the triggerman.

[iamomes]

Wow good read

[bgcasper]

hopefully kev next interview will touch that subject ...i will not talk on it

[attila]

In Alonso's interview with Judson Bacot about the murder of Robert Ballou at the Palledium, he says he is mystified as to why he was made the scapegoat and was send to jail for 11 years.
He clearly states Mack Thomas and his crew killed Ballou (4:41 to 5:02)



If Mack Thomas snitched on or scapegoated someone to save his own ass in a murder case in which he was involved in 1974, who is to say he didn't do something similar in 1972.

According to anyone who has known him, Mack Thomas was a stone killer. If you add up the fact he also had no problem sending someone else to jail for life or even the death penalty to stay out of jail himself, what you have is a nothing less than a psychopath.
But yet he is held in the highest regard.
I would love to find out more about him from people who knew him.

[TheAngels]

I never held the idea that anyone was above snitching.

I've seen documented reports of some of the most respected OGs and leaders in the streets snitching to cops because their very freedom was on the line. I can't say I blame them either because I'm not in the same predicament they were placed in. All it shows me is that a lot of "street code" is predicated off of flimsy BS, and everyone isn't going to be loyal.

[LionTheOracle]

Deep way to put it Attila, I love when people keep it real and not make someone bigger than life. You got my respect.
Is your screen inspired by Attila the Hun?

[attila]

It doesn't seem like a topic people want to mess with somehow.

And yes, my nickname is from Attila the Hun.

[bgcasper]

its not something he was known for but hey ...paperwork is paperwork ..wait on that element to apear on interviews ...because reaction of users here dont really matter .. its people his generation that matter the most wonder how ooog jimmy will will react knowing he vouch for him last interview sayin it would be the one on his side if on the battlefiels ...i bet he didnt knew the existence of this case nobody want to go to war side by side with a snich ...

[xxx]

keep in mind, these are not trial transcripts.

This is an appeal, writing up by the appealants attorney.

Appeals are not considered paperwork.

Get the Trail transcripts typed by the court reporter during the court procedures.

[xxx]

This Is The Police Talking on Mack thomas.

Not Mack Thomas Testimony.

Police Lie All the Time in Police Reports

[xxx]

Mack Thomas had not been called as a witness in the case. Defense counsel made a motion to strike the testimony of Ortiz relating the statements made by Mack Thomas on the ground that the officer's testimony about what Thomas had told him was inadmissible because Mack Thomas was "unavailable" as a witness.


POLICE TESTIMONY

HEARSAY

[bgcasper]

thank you very much .... thats why i wasnt jumpin around ..not cause i bias toward cc

[bgcasper]

Trail transcripts typed by the court ...that piece of document can be police propaganda in order to create kaos inside

[attila]

"Mack Thomas was then called as a witness and appeared with his counsel, a deputy public defender. He refused to answer questions posed by defense counsel on the grounds that the answers thereto might incriminate him."

It says he did apear in court, but your saying all of this is could be set up to create chaos on the streets?
It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case, for what i've read about police practises in those days.
Maybe we should look into officers Knott and Ortiz a little, to see what kind of police they where.

But when are you considered a snitch on the streets? When there's absolute proof?
When is someone given the benefit of the doubt? I know only the rumor was enough to get a whole lot of young men killed.
Maybe someone can ask Tyrone Tate what his definition of a snitch is, since that's one of the three things he is "zero tolerance" on.

[xxx]

Your a Documented Snitch if you testify on the Stand In Court

or

You Sign a Statement at the Police Station.

A Police Officers Lone words are NOT CREDIBLE....

Police Officers are liers by Nature.

They Lie In Court & Lie On Police Reports.

They use questionable tactics in the interrogations.

Manipulation & deception is part of their strategy.

[xxx]

You cant Label People Snitches without Proof or their would be alot of people dead cuz of hidden agendas and dirty tricks.

Cant Go Off a Haunch or a guilt feeling.

You can personally ostracize an individual you feel at no good, but you can put a jacket on a guy without Paperwork.

[alexalonso]

thats deep.

[attila]

I agree.
But it looks to me people do get labeled a snitch very quick and because of that a lot of people are dead. Weather they were actually snitching or not.

Can't call this a haunch or a guilt feeling though.
Thomas said he wouldn't answer any questions because he was afraid he would incriminate himself.
He didn't say he was being framed or anything of that nature.

Also, Judson Bacot said he saw Thomas and his crew kill Ballou while he did time for it.
He looked very angry.

It's not to make a snitch of Mack Thomas, but as Alonso and Kev Mac are working on the true history of the Crips and Bloods, i think it would be good to look critical at the people who are now labeled legends.

[bgcasper]

there is still livin ooog that did run with mac that are still alive they could look at that paper and get an answer or there s a gang of name on that file if anybody alive ?? its an important point ...

[bgcasper]

people that knew mac and had the mic could make a round table around mac thomas and grandee history the ooog bitter dogg from tana would have a major seat but i know zane is still alive a guy like ooog frogg or ooog jimmy would be precious also both ooog tater and ooog pigmy are major witness on who was mac thomas i would put some old west sider to the mix like pookie since he knew mac also but defenetly guys like lil vince from piru or other grandee rep that are still alive are missing to the puzzle

[alexalonso]

it appears that Mack Thomas made a statement to police. Am I wrong?

[attila]

No, you're right.