Attorney General Rob McKenna's office put out a "Fact vs. Claim" press release today setting out to debunk what it says are inaccuracies about McKenna's anti-gang bill.

McKenna's bill (excellent summary here ) allows cities to take out protective orders or injunctions against alleged gang members to prohibit them from gang activity.

One of the false claims, the press release says, is a quote that ACLU lobbyist Shankar Narayan gave PubliCola .

CLAIM

“In a gang injunction, you have the potential for unspecified behavior — remember, injunctions don’t require any crime to happen, just that a gang exists and this person is a member — by an individual [where]  little or no evidence may exist other than their dress and associations, against ‘the community’ —ACLU’s Shankar Narayan, PubliCola, Jan. 20, 2011)

FACT

Both the proposed sentencing enhancements and civil protection order require the prosecutor to prove to a judge that an individual is a member of a street gang as defined in RCW 9.94A.030. Among the defining legal characteristics of "criminal street gang" is having as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal acts, and whose members or associates individually or collectively engage in a pattern of criminal street gang activity "Criminal street gang associate or member" means” a person who actively participates in any criminal street gang and who intentionally promotes, furthers or assists in any criminal act by the criminal street gang.”

As defined by law, some of those criminal acts include: Committing acts to gain admission, prestige or promotion within the gang, increasing the gang's size or control in any geographical area, Exacting revenge or retribution for the gang, obstructing justice, Intimidating any witness against the gang or any member of the gang, Dealing drugs,Trafficking in stolen property, Promoting prostitution.

For the record, we put Narayan's quote in this context:

Here’s the deal: The bill allows law enforcement to seek a “protective order” against an alleged gang member. The provision was modeled, the AGs office says, along the lines of a domestic violence protective order, where, indeed, the respondent (the alleged abuser), doesn’t have a constitutional right to an attorney. (In the AGs analgoy, the community at large is the abused partner).

The city has to show “by clear and convincing evidence” that a criminal gang exists and prove that the suspect is a member. Once the protective order is granted, the alleged gang member can be prohbited from a long list of activities, including: violating curfew, wearing gang clothing, intimidating people, associating with other gang members, possessing alcohol, and carrying weapons.