MAPA'S Nativo Lopez Warns Obama: Legalization or No Re-Election

| by Denise A Justin

Undaunted by eight felony counts alleging fraudulent voter registration, fraudulently voting or attempting to vote at an election, perjury, and related charges, Nativo Lopez, National President of MAPA (Mexican American Political Association) issued an official opinion on how Latinos and others should vote in the November 2 California election.

Orange Juice, a popular Orange County political blog, posted Nativo Lopez announces General Election recommendations on October 26, 2010, prefaced by an Introduction, which concludes, “…we are not confident that the Democratic Party in California or nationally will do anything beyond managing the crisis for big capital at the continued expense of working people.” _medium=rss&utm campaign=nativo-lopez-announces-general-election-recommendations

 Let’s see how he did on his choices for election, considering he was just ordered on October 20 (six days before) by Judge Patricia Schnegg to undergo yet another examination to determine his mental competency to stand trial.

Here  are the MAPA recommendations posted by Nativo Lopez, followed by the Semi-Official Results and percentage of vote they received, according to the Secretary of State (11/10/10).


Governor Jerry Brown (democrat)                                                     (Won –  53.3%)                         

Lieutenant Governor, Gavin Newsom (democrat)                               (Won –  49.9%)

Secretary of State, Marylou Cabral (peace and freedom)                    (Lost – 1.6%)

Controller, Karen Martinez (peace and freedom )                               (Lost – 2.1%)

Treasurer, Debra L. Reiger (peace and freedom)                                (Lost – 1.2%)

Attorney General, Kamala D. Harris (democrat)                                 (Not finalized – 45.6%) 

Insurance Commissioner, Dina Josephine Padilla (peace and freedom) (Lost - 3.0%)


Measures submitted to the voters: (MAPA’s recommendation followed by results.)

Proposition 19 – Yes   (Results:   NO)

Proposition 20 – Yes   (Results:  YES)

Proposition 21 – No    (Results:   NO)

Proposition 22 – Yes   (Results:  YES)

Proposition 23 – No    (Results:   NO)

Proposition 24 – No    (Results:   NO)

Proposition 25 – No    (Results:  YES)

Proposition 26 – No    (Results:  YES)

Proposition 27--No     (Results:   NO)

On October 28, 2010, Nativo flexed his political muscles in, “LEGALIZATION OR NO RE-ELECTION  We Really Meant It!

At the conclusion of a logical and clearly presented tirade on the fate of immigrants under the current Administration, he admonishes political officials:

“Well, yes, we  meant it!  NO re-election for the elected officials and their party in power until we secure LEGALIZATION for our families. We will not be talked down to by President Obama or held hostage to his dismissive declaration that things will be worst with the opposition party, the Republican.”

There was a special warning for President Obama:  

“There must be consequences for bad policies and even worst actions, Mr. President. Contrariwise, no one can speak with any seriousness or authority about political accountability. LEGALIZATION or NO RE-ELECTION is most appropriate at this election juncture of November 2010.”

And then the pitch for followers (a group that shrinks dramatically at each court appearance):  

"Join us in this prolonged campaign for driver’s licenses and visas for our families. The first step in making change is to join an organization that pursues the change we desire. We welcome you to our ranks."


Let’s look at Nativo through the eyes of Judge Patricia Schnegg on October 20, 2010, in Dept. 123, Superior Court, in Los Angeles.

Juliet Schmidt, Deputy District Attorney, and John Powers, Deputy Public Defender representing Nativo Lopez, announced their appearance, and Nativo joined in.  Here’s how that went, in excerpts from the official court transcript:

DEFENDANT [Nativo Lopez] :  “Here for the case today, Your Honor, under special appearance as agent for the secure party creditor for the surety over the defendant  Nativo Lopez hereinafter known as the defendant.    

“ I'd like to pass this to Your Honor.  I've asked for a special protective order issued by the Court to -- by Mr. Powers so that the evidence that I've submitted to the Court and to your private chambers can be reviewed in private chambers.  A substantial amount of evidence has been submitted, and I'd request an in camera hearing so that that evidence can be reviewed and that would allow us to move forward and settle and close this matter and allow the fiduciaries the opportunity to move forward and set and close this matter.  If I may give it to you.”                                          

THE COURT [Judge Schnegg]:  “Sir, let me tell you a couple of things.  Number one, you're represented by counsel.  And even if you weren't, any communications that are sent directly to my chambers are what's called ex-parte communications which are strictly forbidden under the Code of Ethics.  

“So I can tell you that you've been sending numerous documents to my chambers.  I do not read them if I know they're from you.  If I can tell that right away, I don't open them.  I have unopened letters from you because I am not allowed to open them or to review them by operation of law.”

DEFENDANT [Nativo Lopez]:  May I respond to that, Your Honor?”

COURT [Judge Schnegg]:  No, not yet, you can't.”

DEFENDANT [Nativo Lopez]:  Okay.”

(After a brief  public discussion with Deputy Public Defender John Powers, Judge Schnegg continued addressing Defendant Nativo Lopez.)

COURT [Judge Schnegg]:  “The matters in this case have been suspended because I declared a doubt on your competence to stand trial.  You were ordered to see Dr. Sharma twice.  The first time was a disaster. The second time wasn't a whole lot better.  In fact, you refused to provide any identification to Dr. Sharma.

“And here's the problem there.  Some people, not you, but other people who may have maybe a criminal bent, send a ringer to go see the psychiatrists sometimes.  And that's why it's very important for him to know -- when I order Dr. Sharma to examine Nativo Lopez that it's Nativo Lopez, as opposed to some other party who was calling himself Nativo Lopez.

“And so…you didn't get off very well with Dr. Sharma.  He basically is telling me I should incarcerate you so that he can do an actual exam.  I really don't feel the need to do that at this point in time, but I do need to move this case along.  And in order to move this case along, I need some determination by some doctor of your competence to stand trial.

“I've asked your attorney to select another doctor.  And I do believe that the parties have agreed on Maloney.”   [Discussion regarding selection of doctor and procedure followed.]

COURT  (Judge Schnegg addressing Nativo Lopez):  “Let me just say this to you, there's  nothing I would like better than to resolve this case.  But, unfortunately, once a doubt has been declared, nothing can happen in the case until that issue has been resolved.   For example, if everybody says to me, well, I think he's okay, he can go, he does not have any competency issues under the law, I cannot reinstate proceedings until such time as I have a doctor's report saying that.

“So you are booked into this case I believe on the 16th floor...I'd actually asked for the booking sheet which has your photograph on it and probably a life scan be sent over to Maloney.  So I'm now going to put this matter over to…November 22nd is when we are going to have, hopefully, the report back from Dr. Maloney.  So you're ordered to go to Dr. Maloney's address and set up an appointment and go and meet with Dr. Maloney.

  “…I am precluded by law from considering anything of substance in this case until you have met with Dr. Maloney.”

 DEFENDANT [Nativo Lopez]:  "Well, I conditionally accept your offer under proof of claim that the order that you have just issued will not be complied with under threat, duress, and coercion under many threats to remand me into custody as collateral for the defendant.

“This is not the first time.  This would be the fifth occasion in which I have been either examined by a psychiatrist or ordered such exam.  There can be nothing better to identify a defendant than the certificate of the live birth that was presented to Dr. Sharma.  I did.”  

 COURT [Judge Schnegg]:  “Well, you know your photo when you were a baby is slightly different than your photo now.”

After a lengthy, disjointed dissertation by Nativo, Judge Schnegg explained to him:

COURT [Judge Schnegg]:  -- “I declared a doubt as to your competence to stand trial…I don't know if your role is make believe, if you are just doing this to be obstructive, or if you truly are mentally incompetent.

“Dr. Sharma opines that he's not sure either.  And he goes on and on about the difficulty it is to talk to you at all.  And he believes--he's not sure whether you're trying to deceive him or whether you are -- you're playing games or whether or not you're truly incompetent.  And I'm paraphrasing from Dr. Sharma's letter.

“So I just told you that once a doubt has been declared, I cannot address any substantive issues.  So if you want to discuss substantive issues, which I would love to do, you need to go to Dr. Maloney now because I don't think Dr. Sharma would agree to see you under any circumstances."

(Judge Schnegg confirmed the next court date/time of November 22 at 8:30 a.m. and thanked those present.)

Nativo  had the last word

DEFENDANT [Nativo Lopez]: “I conditionally accept your offer to return to the court at that time for the purpose,  Your Honor, to have the evidence that I submitted into the court be reviewed in private chambers so I can set off settling and close this matter.  Thank you.”

So, the jury is still out on Nativo—or rather, it so far has been unable to convene.  What do you think?  Is Nativo Lopez MAPA’s political pundit or the Great Pretender?