Stiff Sentences Justified for Worst Taggers : Multiple incidents of the ugly, demoralizing vandalism warrant prosecution as a felony

Several recent prosecutions in the San Fernando Valley represent progress in the long, frustrating campaign against graffiti.

Two adult “taggers” pleaded guilty--one in December, one last month--and were given sentences that are stiff for this type of crime. Each is to serve nine months in jail and was ordered to do 100 hours of graffiti cleanup; court-ordered restitution totaled $46,000. A similar case against a third man is pending.

Felony cases for vandalism are fairly rare, despite a law that allows them when the damage--the cost of cleanup--exceeds $5,000. Only about a dozen in L.A. have been filed against adults in five years, the district attorney’s office says.

The twist in the three recent cases is how prosecutors calculated the damage so the amount crossed the felony threshold. The $5,000 was reached by adding up many smaller acts of vandalism. Police and prosecutors say it was the first Valley use in memory of this technique in cases against adults.

And we can expect more in the future, says Detective Craig Rhudy, whose 2-year-old task force of citizen volunteers is the spearhead of the Valley’s anti-graffiti campaign.

“We could do this two or three times a week if we had the manpower,” he says.

To fit the law, he says, the separate acts must be related by a common intent. The intent of taggers is to deface as much public space as possible with their signatures, so a string of vandalism acts lasting as long as a year can constitute a felony.

Rhudy says his 150 to 200 volunteers are seeing signs of diminishing tagging activity--a signal that the campaign is having an effect.

Prosecutors say there is no policy ordering them to file more felony cases using cumulative damage.

But authorities say the technique is justified by statute and case law and will be employed when appropriate.

That is welcome news. Creative prosecutorial aggressiveness against taggers is warranted both by community outrage and the fact that graffiti vandalism is an ugly crime, literally and in its impact on civic morale.