• Was it murder?

  1. Isabel Moritz
  2. Name withheld
  3. Jim Smith

• Correction to “Murder on Venice Blvd.” – Christopher Medak
• A Voice from the 70s – Joanne Zazzi (formerly Joanne Curtis)
• Medical Marijuana – Lisa Green

———————–

Was it murder?

Dear Beachhead,

I am writing you regarding your feature article of this issue. “Murder on Venice Blvd”.

I am really shocked that your paper would write something that irresponsible.  I have been reading your paper for at least 30 years and am a Venice local.

I am very liberal and am not a huge fan of the LAPD, however what happened on Venice Blvd was a horrible accident.

It was invollentary man slaughter.  No one intended to kill that poor girl.  To put a title like that is so tacky.  It is poor journalistic tactics to say the least. Sensationalism to the fullest. You really need to check yourselves!

Isabel Moritz

———-

Dear Beachhead,

Murder, as defined in common law countries, is the unlawful killing of another human being with intent.

Your article about the death in Venice by a cop is horribly irresponsible. Please stick to something you fuckin lunatics know down there on the boardwalk like rollerbladding and step away from the pen.

Thanks,  Name Withheld

—–

The Writer Responds:

Hi Isabel and Anon,

As the writer of the article, “Murder on Venice Blvd.,” I feel that the headline was entirely appropriate. “Intent” is not needed to establish a crime to be murder.

Here’s a “common law” definition of third degree murder (from answers.yahoo.com): “Third degree: killing that resulted from indifference or negligence. Usually there must be a legal duty (parent – child), but can also include crimes like driving drunk and causing a fatal accident.”

Certainly if you or I had been driving at 60 mph on Venice Blvd. at night with our lights out, we would have been arrested on the spot and charged with third degree murder. In spite of their irresponsibility and recklessness, the driver of the police car and his partner have not been subject to any punitive action.

Thanks for your comments.

Jim Smith

———–

Correction to Murder Article

Dear Beachhead,

Thank you for your article on the tragic death of devin Petelski. It was really well written. I must ask that if possible can you make an alteration “According to a family spokesperson, Christopher Medak, Is not atrue statement Although I am aclose friend of the family I am not their spokesperson. That is the Lawyer. I am simply a vocal friend who since her death have questioned and sought out the truth behind the attempted manipulation of the truth. I spoke as a outraged friend and citizen. Thank you

Christopher Medak

————

A Voice from the 70s

Dear Carol and Beachhead,

An old friend of mine who lives in Venice sent me the current Venice Beachhead, and it brought back a ton of fond memories for me. In the old days, I remember the both of us and several others who worked on the paper using the “cut and paste” technique for all our typed articles. It was way before computers and we always walked away with a bunch of glue all over us.

I actually was able to dig out copies of back issues including the December 1972 issue (almost 37 years ago) and it was terrific to read some of the issues. I have included a copy of a portion of that issue. It is hard to believe that I am almost 70 years old and the Beachhead is still going strong.

A big warm thank you to everyone who has been part of the Beachhead and all of those people who have kept it going for over 40 years! What an incredible accomplishment by volunteers! Talk about sustainability!

In peace,

Joanne Zazzi (formerly Joanne Curtis)

————-

Medical Marijuana

Dear Beachhead,

I attended the Venice Town Hall meeting, Nov 5th, regarding Medical Marijuana. The participants were invited to offer suggestions to the representatives of the City of Los Angeles.  Here are some of my observations:

The representative from the City Attorney’s office appeared very guarded, and even torn when addressing the crowd;

The participants overwhelming agree that marijuana (cannabis, in fact) should be available;

A majority at the meeting believed that cannabis should be sold not just offered under the current legislature as a not for profit venture;

The town hall seemed to have large representation from the compassionate caregivers/providers community;

Many suggested that the number of providers be determined by an measurable space, (250 to 1,000 ft) or by the “free market”;

Some even suggested that Venice be excluded from the Ordinance being drafted by the City of Los Angeles, and enter a pilot program which might include offering cannabis for sale at the local farmers market (you’ve got my vote);

The community was engaged and offered other suggestions in an mostly healthy spirit of finding a way to advance the moment to free hemp. I would like to see more of the patient community engaged, offering solutions going forward, along with participants that do not choose to engage in marijuana as a health remedy.

I’m a relative newcomer to the Venice, CA community though I understand why Venice should remain Venice and therefore work side by side, old and new, to keep Venice Free.

With that said, the ordinance in process, should be approached with due diligence, much consideration, and without an idea that more law is the only option. Each of us, providers, patients, and other stakeholders within the community have a responsibility to be accountable, and in balance with our actions.

Let’s be aware that any ordinance, could further criminalize cannabis users. Also, I subscribe to a fair market approach not a free market view which implies, conscious production and consumerism with a holistically sustainable “balanced approach.”  For example, stop hard selling on the Venice Boardwalk, compassionate caregivers. Do not adopt the ways of the keepers of the corporate globalization methods that are devouring our resources (human, nature, and all other beings). You’re offering a herb that brings balance to the body, mind and soul, and the offering should reflect that from the germination to the exhale.

Also, I do  not subscribe to idea that, we the people, have never crafted a way of life before, as paraphrased by the City Attorney representative of the City of Los Angeles. We do that every moment in life because life is about choices.

I have a medical marijuana card.  Typically, I eat marijuana to curb my painful menstruation cycles, and as one of the ways to heal my body, mind and spirit. There was a time when I had breast cancer. I will never have cancer again because I’ve transformed my life. The mind shift includes but is not limited to meditation, exercise, rest, adopting a vegan lifestyle, ridding myself of toxic thinking and toxic relationships, laughing, loving and eating and smoking cannabis.

I support the sale of marijuana and full legalization of  marijuana, along with production of industrialized hemp.  Until then, I advise that the key participants in the movement to “Free Hemp” work together, and resist the urge to pick a side. The future is now.

Free Hemp. Free Venice.

Lisa Green
State Assembly candidate, 53rd District
Green Party of California
www.votelisagreen.net


Related Posts