Rev. Drake Convicted in Zoning Case

Putting aside their avowed sympathy and admiration for a Baptist preacher who transformed his Buena Park church into a sanctuary for the homeless, Municipal Court jurors on Monday found the Rev. Wiley Drake guilty of violating city zoning codes by allowing vagrants to camp in a makeshift shelter.

After two days of deliberations, a jury of seven women and five men voted to convict Drake and his First Southern Baptist Church of Buena Park on four of five misdemeanor counts, rejecting the defense’s argument that Drake’s higher calling to help the homeless took precedence over the city’s zoning rules.

As the jury’s decision was read, Drake was nervously wringing his hands, and finally broke down in tears at the fourth guilty verdict. His tears were shed not for himself but for “the men, women, boys and girls who will be kicked out into the street” because of the verdicts, he said later outside the courtroom.

“It’s a sad day when a nation can say it’s a crime to help people. . . . I’m disappointed that we lost, but we’ll just train harder and work harder in the next round,” Drake said, referring to the defense’s plan to appeal the decision.

Several jurors who agreed to be interviewed after the verdict said they agonized over the decision but had no choice, given the evidence and the instructions given them by Judge Gregg L. Prickett.

Rebecca Ostrander, a 47-year-old legal secretary who was the jury forewoman, said: “I would have given anything to be able to put a little heart in it, but that wasn’t our job. . . . This is one of the hardest things I’ve ever had to do in my life.”

Drake, an outspoken Texas native who succeeded in launching a boycott against Walt Disney Co. earlier this summer at the Southern Baptist Convention, was charged with five misdemeanors related to unauthorized use of a makeshift patio structure and a nearby camp area between June and December of 1996.

The charges themselves were “ticky tacky,” according to juror Bob Boubion, a 42-year-old engineer.

But the case had implications beyond the courtroom because it touched on two national questions: how to provide for a growing number of homeless people at a time when the government is cutting back on social spending, and how far to go in protecting religious beliefs in a court of law.

The case has caught the attention of some in Congress and is being closely watched nationwide by advocates for the homeless, church leaders and city officials who are grappling with similar issues.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Janet Reno’s office is looking into the case, and Vice President Al Gore called the pastor during the two-week trial to express his support, Drake and his attorney said Monday.

Tony Arnold, a law expert at Chapman University, said, “This is just one of many examples of the increasing tension between local government and the exercise of religious beliefs.

“In many cases, we’re seeing that people will engage in civil disobedience to act on their religious beliefs because they view their religious obligations as higher,” Arnold said. “Religious freedom is increasingly becoming a civil rights issue.”

Drake said that while he lost the case, he has no intention of throwing the homeless out.

“I’m going to keep housing, feeding and clothing people as long as I have breath. . . . We’re going to keep doing what we’re doing,” he said, adding that he will continue providing shelter until he is arrested, and that if he is jailed, his church will continue housing the homeless.

“It’s in the Bible, in the Book of Acts: ‘We must obey God.’ That’s what I’m doing, obeying God,” Drake said.

Robert Boston, assistant director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit group, said the guilty verdicts did not surprise him because zoning is such a difficult area.

“People know everyone has a right to worship as they see fit,” he said. “But a lot of people have trouble seeing the provision of social services as religious practice.”

In a separate civil case, Orange County Superior Court Judge Randell L. Wilkinson earlier this month ordered the eviction of 24 homeless men and women from a makeshift shelter on the church’s lot. That decision was partially based on a recent Supreme Court ruling striking down a federal law designed to expand and protect religious freedom.

The Supreme Court decision also undermined one argument that Drake’s defense attorney, Jon Alexander, had planned to use in arguing for acquittal. Earlier this month, Drake was asked to testify before a House Judiciary Committee hearing analyzing the effects of the Supreme Court decision.

When Drake took the stand at his trial, he testified that God’s law commanded him to care for the poor and prevented him from evicting the homeless men and women, who had nowhere else to go. Clutching a leather-bound Bible, Drake was nearly in tears when he spoke about his own struggle with the issue about six years ago when he discovered a drunk asleep on the church breezeway.

“I’ve tried to feed people. I’ve tried to clothe people. I’ve tried to spiritually counsel them,” Drake said on the stand. “If that is against the law . . . then I’m guilty.”

Alexander argued that the pastor was not directly responsible for allowing the homeless on church grounds because he did not invite them, and in fact did everything he could to get them jobs so that they could leave.

Furthermore, Alexander argued, Drake had to protect the homeless because they had nowhere else to go. But Prickett rejected that argument as a defense.

“The judge took my case away from me,” Alexander said. “As soon as the necessity defense was not allowed, I could only hope for jury nullification.”

Ostrander, the jury forewoman, said that was never considered. However, she added that had the judge allowed the necessity defense, the results probably would have been different.

Jurors said they wrestled with two key points: whether Drake acted as the pastor of the church or as an individual, and whether Drake was directly responsible for the people camping on church grounds. On the first issue, jurors mulled over whether to convict the church and not the pastor, but decided in the end that he was responsible for church activities.

On the second question, jurors agreed with Alexander that city officials should have cited the homeless people themselves, not the pastor, if they had broken the law by sleeping in their vehicles on church property.

Half a dozen jurors who were interviewed agreed that Drake’s efforts to help the homeless were praiseworthy, and some even approached the pastor after the verdict was announced to shake his hand.

Michele Pryor, a 22-year-old store manager, said: “We know he was doing good and it was hard to punish somebody who was doing good. I’m compassionate. Pastor Drake is doing a wonderful job--I couldn’t do what he is doing--but he needs to follow the law like everybody else. He has the same rules as anybody else. He’s a man like everybody else.”

While some of the jurors were religious, they managed to put that aside to concentrate on the letter of the law, said juror Christopher Jordan, a 19-year-old carpenter who described himself as a non-practicing Catholic.

The prosecutor “was very precise about that,” Jordan said, recalling the admonition is his closing argument: “Don’t be clouded by religious or personal feelings.”

John Curtis, who lives near the church, agreed with the verdict.

“I don’t mind people helping people, but it brings a lot of riffraff over here. It’s kind of a bad situation,” said Curtis, adding that the church shelter and all the homeless on the corner across the street bring down property values as well.

While many area residents complained about the homeless situation in the area, Drake had supporters as well.

Nieves Gallego, another neighbor, called the verdict “ridiculous.”

“That’s his church property and he’s doing what the city should be doing--helping the poor,” Gallego said. “They’re doing nobody any harm.”

City officials have insisted throughout the trial that the case is not about helping the homeless, but instead deals with the pastor’s bold breach of the law, cloaked in a humanitarian argument. Gregory Palmer, assistant city prosecutor, said during closing arguments last week that the pastor could have chosen to help the homeless in a legal manner but chose not to do so.

The prosecution told jurors that Drake endangered the church and area residents by allowing criminals, drug addicts and others to camp on the property in violation of zoning laws. During a three-month period last year, police answered 23 calls to the church in response to crimes such as assault and drug use, Palmer said.

Palmer denied taking any pleasure in seeing Drake humbled in court.

“There’s no chest-thumping here,” he said. “I had an emotional reaction too. I have emotions just like anybody else. . . . Of course, I’m pleased with the verdict. I always knew we had the evidence to win this verdict. But I’m sad it had to come to this point. Rev. Drake had ample opportunity to resolve the issues involved instead of making it a cause celebre.”

Ending a misdemeanor trial that lasted more than two weeks, which is unusually long for such a case, the jury’s decision is expected to result in the eviction of about 50 people from the church.

At the church, the mood was somber as the men and women tried to fathom their fate.

One 75-year-old woman, Mae, who has been living at the church for three months, said the church helped her find a place to sleep and food to eat.

“I’m upset. . . . The homeless here aren’t beggars. They’re just looking for a place to stand up again,” she said. “I don’t know what will happen now. I hope they will give a 30-day notice before evicting us.

“I’m not afraid of being put out in the street again, but what will happen to everyone else?”

Orange County contains an estimated 10,000 to 13,000 homeless people and only about 1,000 shelter beds to accommodate them, indicating that some of the church’s residents might not be able to find alternative shelters, authorities said.

Sentencing is set for Aug. 22. The pastor faces a maximum six months in jail and $1,000 fine for each count, but Palmer has said he would ask for five years’ probation and a court order to force Drake to cease all illegal activities.

Ostrander, who is a Buena Park homeowner, said, “The whole case just makes my stomach nauseous. . . . I don’t think any of [the trial] should have happened in the first place.”

Contributing to this report was Times correspondent Mimi Ko Cruz.