ACLU, Mansoor contend in court

Nearly two years after the Costa Mesa City Council took a controversial vote to have police enforce immigration law, the issue has cooled significantly, mainly because the city never took on enforcement duties.

But one aspect of the issue has never been resolved. Police arrested 26-year-old Benito Acosta at a Jan. 3, 2006, City Council meeting after he spoke at the podium and urged supporters to stand up.

County prosecutors declined to file the charges under their jurisdiction — resisting arrest and battery of a police officer, Orange County District Attorney spokeswoman Susan Schroeder said at the time — but the city pursued alleged municipal code violations. Acosta’s trial on three misdemeanor charges began Thursday and is expected to last through midweek.

Costa Mesa City Prosecutor Dan Peelman aims to show that Acosta, also known as Coyotl Tezcatlipoca, came to the council meeting intending to rile up the crowd and use civil disobedience to make his point.

In testimony Friday, Lt. David Andersen talked about how Acosta was “inciting” people by speaking through a bullhorn before the meeting, and Peelman questioned witnesses about whether Acosta appeared angry.

The defense wants to prove Acosta was treated too harshly by police and that he was treated differently because of his point of view.

The defense’s claims partly rest on contrasting how Mayor Allan Mansoor treated Minuteman Project leader Jim Gilchrist to how he treated Acosta.

Defense attorneys argue that Acosta merely did what Gilchrist did, asking supporters to stand up, and only Acosta was punished for it.

Here’s what is on the city’s recording of the meeting during Gilchrist’s turn at the podium, though the camera is on Gilchrist and the audience can’t be seen:

Gilchrist: “My name is Jim Gilchrist; I’m the founder of the Minuteman Project. At the end of my speech I’m going to ask all the members of the Minuteman Project and the supporters to stand up rather than applause and make a lot of noise. OK, will you guys stand up? Thank you.”

Mansoor: “Uh, actually, if we — thank you, I appreciate that. Mr. Gilchrist, are you asking that you’re going to be the only speaker so the others don’t speak?”

After Gilchrist is finished, Mansoor advises someone with a sign not to block the aisle, but he doesn’t specifically say no one can stand. In a post on the Daily Pilot website Friday, Mansoor wrote that he did object when Gilchrist’s supporters stood, “and the people immediately sat down.”

Defense attorneys on Thursday asked Mansoor about his honorary membership in the Minuteman Project. In court, Mansoor took pains to explain that he never participated in the group, other than thanking them when they granted him honorary membership.

“He’s never received a certificate, he’s never been to an event” held by the Minutemen, Peelman said.

Why does the connection matter?

The Minuteman Project is staunchly opposed to illegal immigration, so to the defense, a Mansoor-Minuteman link would help show the mayor was predisposed to listen to people like Gilchrist who supported his immigration plan, and to quash the free speech of those disagreed, like Acosta.

Perhaps supporting the defense’s case is the fact that later in 2006, Mansoor allowed a Minuteman-affiliated group — the Gilchrist Angels — to throw him a campaign fundraiser. And he apparently didn’t refuse the honorary membership, even if he didn’t ask for it and didn’t participate with the group any further.

“The record shows that he has gone to bed with the Minutemen organization,” defense attorney B. Kwaku Duren said. “He never said, ‘Oh, well, I rejected the membership.’”

But that’s politics, and it may be hard to carry a political argument with a group of jurors who, if they’re average citizens, may not follow politics very closely. The prosecution may be counting on that.

Their strategy appears simpler: show that there was tension in the air at the meeting. Show that Acosta helped raise the level of tension. Show that he refused to cooperate with police and caused the mayor to halt the meeting. Convince jurors of those things, and they might find him guilty.

When asked about the situation a few days after Acosta’s arrest, Mansoor said Acosta had “a history of disrupting our meetings,” and that he’d made it clear no disruptions would be allowed. Indeed, Acosta called the mayor “a [expletive] racist pig” before the council’s Dec. 6 vote to approve local immigration enforcement.

Two police officers told the court when Acosta refused to leave the chambers and then began struggling with them, they were afraid violence would erupt because the crowd became noisy and advanced on them.

“It was a very volatile issue that could be a flash point to a much more serious situation if it was allowed to continue,” Costa Mesa Police Officer Dan Guth said.

But, for the same reason it’s tough to prove what Mansoor thinks about the Minutemen, the prosecution might get hung up trying to show Acosta came to the meeting with plans to disrupt it.

When Peelman asked local attorney Chris Blank on Friday whether Acosta intended to use civil disobedience, Blank said although he and Acosta are on friendly terms, he never heard of any such intention.

Guth said when officers were struggling with Acosta outside the chambers, his supporters tried to surround them and threw objects at them, though he couldn’t say what objects.

When the trial wraps up, likely by the middle of next week, it won’t be the end of the issue. There’s still a pending civil case the ACLU filed against the city on Acosta’s behalf. If that reaches trial, many of the same arguments probably will be brought up again.

To view the video of the Jan. 3, 2006, council meeting, go to costamesa.granicus.com/Viewpublisher.php?view_id=4#council

ALICIA ROBINSON may be reached at (714) 966-4626 or at alicia.robinson@latimes.com.