Exculpatory evidence is evidence favorable to a defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates or criminal case, we can NOW be criminally charged for trespass on our own reservation. PECHANGA IGNORED this evidence and took hearsay evidence of a child molestor.
Here's the letter Dr. John Johnson, of Santa Barbara's Natural History Museum sent to the Pechanga Enrollment Committee.They are a termination committee, as they have terminated more Native Americans, than they've enrolled in the past ten years.
Here's the letter Dr. John Johnson, of Santa Barbara's Natural History Museum sent to the Pechanga Enrollment Committee.They are a termination committee, as they have terminated more Native Americans, than they've enrolled in the past ten years.
SANTA BARBARA MUSEUM OF
NATURAL HISTORY
2559 Puesta del Sol Rd. Santa Barbara, CA 93105
NATURAL HISTORY
2559 Puesta del Sol Rd. Santa Barbara, CA 93105
Pechanga Tribal Council
Pechanga Indian Reservation
Temecula Band of Luiseño Mission Indians
P. O. Box 1477
Temecula, CA 92953
Dear Council Members:
I am writing to respond to the Record of Decision issued March 16, 2006 by the Pechanga Enrollment Committee regarding disenrollment of the lineal descendants of Paulina Hunter. I was surprised and dismayed when I read the “Conclusions” section on pages 25-26 of that decision, because I felt that many of the conclusions were either based on misinterpretations of the documentary evidence or unjustified by what had been presented earlier in the text of the Record of Decision.
In the summer and fall of 2004, I prepared a report on “The Ancestry of Paulina Hunter” at the request of the Pechanga Enrollment Committee. Although the Committee references this report in its list of documents that it reviewed (Doc. 14 on p. 4), my findings were completely overlooked in the Record of Decision.
In the report that I prepared at the Enrollment Committee’s behest, I reviewed the genealogical clues to Paulina Hunter’s background. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that Paulina Hunter’s father was Mateo Quasacac, who was the only Indian listed as having been born at “Pichanga” in the surviving early records of Mission San Luis Rey. Mateo Quasacac was also the father of Michaela Quilig (“Michella Quilich”), a life-long resident of Temecula and Pechanga. Michaela Quilig was an original Pechanga allottee like Paulina Hunter. Paulina Hunter would stay with Michaela Quilig when she would visit Pechanga, an indication of the closeness of their relationship. This is to be expected for two women who were half-sisters.
My report presented significant evidence that Paulina Hunter’s maternal grandmother, Restituta, was born at the original village of Temecula. Thus, Paulina Hunter descended from an original Temecula family. This information directly contradicts the statement
asserted in Conclusion 4 of the Record of Decision that “Paulina Hunter is not of Temecula Descent.”
Conclusion 5, which states, “Paulina Hunter was not an original Pechanga Temecula person,” is incorrect. I have already pointed out that my report presented evidence that Paulina’s father was the only Indian listed in the early San Luis Rey mission records who was actually born at Pechanga. Furthermore, the reasoning presented in Conclusion 5 is entirely based upon a misinterpretation of the evidence. John Miller, Paulina Hunter’s grandson, stated on his enrollment application (authorized by the 1928 California Indian
Jurisdictional Act) that his “Grandmother and Great Grandparents were San Luis Rey Mission Indians.” The Record of Decision incorrectly concludes that “the correct tribal ancestry of Paulina Hunter was San Luis Rey” and therefore not Pechanga Temecula.
In fact, the label “San Luis Rey Mission Indians” was an equivalent term to the way “Luiseños” is used today. All Pechanga Temecula Indians were “San Luis Rey Mission Indians,” because all tribe members today all have ancestors who were baptized at Mission San Luis Rey. As some on the Pechanga council well know, I have responded frequently to requests by current tribal members to reconstruct their family genealogies using the mission records. Thus, I am in a position to know that virtually everyone in the tribe today descends from “San Luis Rey Mission Indians.” John Miller’s statement on his enrollment application doesn’t make him any different that anyone else who was a Pechanga Temecula tribe member at that time.
Indeed, there are many enrollment applications for people who are ancestors of today’s Pechanga tribe members that make virtually identical statements to that made by John Miller.
It is unfair to the descendants of Paulina Hunter to be disenrolled from the Temecula Band of Luiseño Mission Indians based upon these incorrect conclusions contained in the Record of Decision of March 16, 2006. There is no credible evidence that Paulina Hunter was not a member of the Pechanga Temecula tribe; in fact the preponderance of the
genealogical evidence contained in surviving records would indicate that she was a descendant of both Pechanga and Temecula ancestors.
Sincerely,
John R. Johnson, Ph.D.
Anthropology Department Head
Advancing Appreciation and Understanding of Natural Science Founded 1916
Pechanga Indian Reservation
Temecula Band of Luiseño Mission Indians
P. O. Box 1477
Temecula, CA 92953
Dear Council Members:
I am writing to respond to the Record of Decision issued March 16, 2006 by the Pechanga Enrollment Committee regarding disenrollment of the lineal descendants of Paulina Hunter. I was surprised and dismayed when I read the “Conclusions” section on pages 25-26 of that decision, because I felt that many of the conclusions were either based on misinterpretations of the documentary evidence or unjustified by what had been presented earlier in the text of the Record of Decision.
In the summer and fall of 2004, I prepared a report on “The Ancestry of Paulina Hunter” at the request of the Pechanga Enrollment Committee. Although the Committee references this report in its list of documents that it reviewed (Doc. 14 on p. 4), my findings were completely overlooked in the Record of Decision.
In the report that I prepared at the Enrollment Committee’s behest, I reviewed the genealogical clues to Paulina Hunter’s background. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that Paulina Hunter’s father was Mateo Quasacac, who was the only Indian listed as having been born at “Pichanga” in the surviving early records of Mission San Luis Rey. Mateo Quasacac was also the father of Michaela Quilig (“Michella Quilich”), a life-long resident of Temecula and Pechanga. Michaela Quilig was an original Pechanga allottee like Paulina Hunter. Paulina Hunter would stay with Michaela Quilig when she would visit Pechanga, an indication of the closeness of their relationship. This is to be expected for two women who were half-sisters.
My report presented significant evidence that Paulina Hunter’s maternal grandmother, Restituta, was born at the original village of Temecula. Thus, Paulina Hunter descended from an original Temecula family. This information directly contradicts the statement
asserted in Conclusion 4 of the Record of Decision that “Paulina Hunter is not of Temecula Descent.”
Conclusion 5, which states, “Paulina Hunter was not an original Pechanga Temecula person,” is incorrect. I have already pointed out that my report presented evidence that Paulina’s father was the only Indian listed in the early San Luis Rey mission records who was actually born at Pechanga. Furthermore, the reasoning presented in Conclusion 5 is entirely based upon a misinterpretation of the evidence. John Miller, Paulina Hunter’s grandson, stated on his enrollment application (authorized by the 1928 California Indian
Jurisdictional Act) that his “Grandmother and Great Grandparents were San Luis Rey Mission Indians.” The Record of Decision incorrectly concludes that “the correct tribal ancestry of Paulina Hunter was San Luis Rey” and therefore not Pechanga Temecula.
In fact, the label “San Luis Rey Mission Indians” was an equivalent term to the way “Luiseños” is used today. All Pechanga Temecula Indians were “San Luis Rey Mission Indians,” because all tribe members today all have ancestors who were baptized at Mission San Luis Rey. As some on the Pechanga council well know, I have responded frequently to requests by current tribal members to reconstruct their family genealogies using the mission records. Thus, I am in a position to know that virtually everyone in the tribe today descends from “San Luis Rey Mission Indians.” John Miller’s statement on his enrollment application doesn’t make him any different that anyone else who was a Pechanga Temecula tribe member at that time.
Indeed, there are many enrollment applications for people who are ancestors of today’s Pechanga tribe members that make virtually identical statements to that made by John Miller.
It is unfair to the descendants of Paulina Hunter to be disenrolled from the Temecula Band of Luiseño Mission Indians based upon these incorrect conclusions contained in the Record of Decision of March 16, 2006. There is no credible evidence that Paulina Hunter was not a member of the Pechanga Temecula tribe; in fact the preponderance of the
genealogical evidence contained in surviving records would indicate that she was a descendant of both Pechanga and Temecula ancestors.
Sincerely,
John R. Johnson, Ph.D.
Anthropology Department Head
Advancing Appreciation and Understanding of Natural Science Founded 1916
45 comments:
Thank you Dr. Johnson. I was very pleased that you prepaired the report as requested by the Pechanga enrollment comm. To our dismay, they ignored tour findings.
Thank you again,
Hunter descendant
Remember it was the enrollment comm that hired Dr. Johnson, not us. They wanted to know the true facts. To which they completely ignored.
Our resident tribal hack will come here and say that we got due process and that the facts were not on our side.
Well the only so called evidence that was presented against us was hearsay presented by elders from the CPP faction of the tribe, most of whom were close family members of some of the enrollment committee members.
So how were we afforded due process when people with a clear conflict of interest were allowed to rule on our case?
As stated many times before, the enrollment committee said that they could ignore any piece of evidence that disagreed with their conclusion that we are not true tribal members if, in their estimation, that more credible evidence contradicted the mountain of evidence in our favor.
Examples of what they considered credible?
1. A statement from Vincent Ibanez written from prison where he was finishing up a sentence for child molestation.
2. Statements from people such as Raymond Basquez Sr in which he listed elders no longer alive from previous generations that they allegedly said we are not Pechanga.
Note: One of those deceased elders listed by Basquez, Solida Stevenson, actually testified in favor of three of Paulina Hunter's children in their probate in 1938 for their share of the Hunter family allotment.
So there's no proof any of the elders quoted by Basquez ever said we aren't Pechanga.
Evidence the enrollment committee didn't think was credible:
1. Testimony by elder *Antonio
Ashman, who lived in the historical period of the late 1800's when the reservation was created, prior to the first written enrollment of 1978 in which he said in a notarized statement that he remembered Paulina Hunter as a member of the Band.
*Called a vaunted (much praised elder on Pechnaga.com the tribe's official Web site.
2. Notarized statements in the 1915 probate for Paulina Hunter's allotment by elders Dolores Tortuga and Jose David Rodriquez in which they stated they knew Paulina as their neighbor on both the Pauba Ranch, one of the old Temecula Indian villaga sites, as well as on the reservation when it was created.
Tortuga said when asked if she remembered deceased Pechanga Indian allottee Paulina Hunter, "I knew here as a neighbor when WE PECHANGA INDIANS lived at the Pauba Ranch near Temecula, Ca."
Clearly, contrary to our critics contentions, that Tortuga included Paulina in the inclusive "WE PECHANGA INDIANS."
We have answered our critics other assertions many times so for the sake of keeping this post short I will not take on his other assertions he will likely parrot again at this time.
SO HOW AGAIN WERE WE AFFORDED DUE PROCESS? WHY DON'T YOU ANSWER ME THIS TIME?
Under the equal protection clause of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, sometimes referred as the Pechanga Band, under Article V:
"IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE BAND TO UPHOLD AND ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION, BYLAWS, AND ORDINANCES OF THE TEMECULA BAND OF LUISENO MISSION INDIANS; AND ALSO, TO UPHOLD THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OF EACH MEMBER WITHOUT MALICE OR PREJUDICE."
So tribal hack, how again were we afforded due process when the sisters of Raymond Basquez Sr, Irhene Scearce and Ruth Masiel, were allowed to rule on our disenrollment case.
And this is not the only violation of the Constitution and Bylaws and/or tribal laws and procedures that were not followed in our case.
So gentle readers, will our critic answer me this time or will he just state the stupid simple due process statement again?
So freak'n what! Why should I care as a Californian if another group of people are put into a position that I can never hope achieve. Maybe, just maybe we are happy that you got ripped off, after all we have also lost our homes and jobs, and sometimes it feels good to not be the only person who was robbed.
You think by posting these facts that we Californians will rally around to your cause? I think not, only those who are already wealthy and well off might take an intrest (as long as it didn't negitively effect there position).
Well anonymous, Maybe if they took away your US citizenship and the federal court ignored all the concrete proof you had and the final decision was made by a person who would benefit by getting your house if you were kicked out of the country, maybe you would fight to right this wrond and expect people to be symathetic.
Did you guys see the article about the tribal casinos fixing the ATM machines to accept welfare payment cards?..seems like in the last 8 months alone over 1.8 million in money meant for food was spent at California Tribal Casinos...the tribes sure are hard up to make money...anyway they can....California wants the money back...i say...send a bill to the casinos...
Why would the committee not believe actual people who lived with paulina bs criminal who were not alive during her tome?
Because the "criminals" had close family ties with some of those who would sit in judgment . And who says they didn't believe the people who actually lived with Paulina Hunter? They just choose to reject the information.
When some of the people who are to decide your fate are the very same people who have brought the allegations against you, it is no surprise as to the end result.
Its sort of like having a rape victim, judged by the very same person who raped them (this is how I felt having them look down on me in judgment with sneers and contempt upon there faces).
"Why would the committee not believe actual people who lived with paulina bs criminal who were not alive during her tome?"
Why would they believe a current convicted child molestor, Vincent Ibanez, over a vaunted elder (much praised), called so on Pechanga.com their own Web site, Antonio Ashman who knew Paulina Hunter and who lived in the historical period of when the reservation was created?
Because it contradicted their foregone conclusion that we were going to be disenrolled.
Interesting that current elders were listed in the Hunter Record of Decision (ROD) and some were described as saying we are legitimate tribal members and others, all from the CPP faction, who said we are not.
But in the case of Mr. Ashman the ROD simply states that it was regarding recognition and it doesn't say if he was for or against us.
Because if the ROD quoted what Mr. Ashman had to say, that he remembered Paulina Hunter as a member of the Band, then they would have had to throw out their bogus decision to disenroll us.
Remember that in the ROD the enrollment committee said they could reject anything that contradicted their conclusion on the basis that more credible evidence existed.
Again I ask, what is more credible, a notarized statment from noted tribal historian Mr. Ashman or a non notarized letter written from prison by child molestor Ibanez?
Also as stated, there were conflicting statements from current elders listed in the Hunter ROD where some said we are Pechanga and some said we are not.
So why were all of the statements from the CPP faction, some of whom, as we have stated many times, just happened to be close relatives of the people with the deciding votes on the enrollment committee, given more crediblity than elders not from the CPP faction?
So, for the thousandth time, tribal hack tell us again how the facts were not on our side and how we were given due process. BE SPECIFIC THIS TIME.
I am still waiting!
This is who the enrollment committee didn't believe regarding the Hunter family being original Pechanga Indians:
Taken directly from the history section of the tribe's Pechanga Web site.
"The Temecula Indians were advised and warned by our friends that, for our own protection, rather than resist any longer we should submit. We complied, and our possessions are carried away in wagons while we walked behind. We were taken into the hills south of Temecula River. The location is now near the west end of Loma Linda Road on the Temecula Creek Golf-course's fairway. The late Antonio Ashman, a vaunted Pechanga Tribal member born three years after the eviction recounted how the eviction-trek ended: "They just dumped them here"— pointing to a low hill near the golf-course. "Just dumped them!"
http://www.pechanga-nsn.gov/page?pageId=6
Mark Macarro said at General Membership meeting in 2005 a year before the Hunters disenrollment that the tribe should listen to what wise elders such as Mr. Ashman had to say.
So Mark why didn't you believe him regarding my family?
"Mark Macarro said at General Membership meeting in 2005 a year before the Hunters disenrollment that the tribe should listen to what wise elders such as Mr. Ashman had to say."
What did The late Antonio Ashman have to say about Paluina Hunter? He stated in a signed deposition that he knew her personally as a member of the band.
So, then, does the Pechanga Committee to Disenroll Members believe that Antonio Ashman is a liar?
yep...he was also white
Collusion between the Enrollment Committee and the Tribal Council?
Wow, evil never ends. Insult a dead indian who was alive during the eviction of the Temecula indians by calling him "White"? I hope you can be forgivin by the creator, and your relations.
Casino indian, with no culture. We see right thru your comment about Mr. Ashman.
Getting back to the orginial blog, can anyone tell me if there are any current members that are ancestors of Michelle Quilich?
I don't think there are any living descendants of Micheala (Michelle)in the tribe.
If some come forward, do you think the tribe would let them in even if the moratorium wasn't in place?
After all she was a close family member of Paulina Hunter.
Because if her descendants are let in doesn't that mean that we (the Hunters) should be in also?
Does anyone know or have a list of all tribe members? I know that some of my family is in moratorium but was wondering if at anytime was my ancestors registered tribe members.
The list of tribal members is confidential so unless we can get someone to give us the current mailing list, which I don't think it is going to happen anytime soon, we are not likely to find out who is listed.
A poster here said recently that there are 89 people who are listed as getting per capita checks that no one knows who they are.
He or she implied that those checks are going into secret accounts of certain tribal leaders.
I don't know if this is true and I don't know how he or she knows this is the case, but it is true, it would be the thread that breaks the camel's back in uncovering the corruption that is at Pechanga.
I would like to think it is true and if the tribe didn't do anything about it, then the Feds would.
Hey, its a internal matter. The Feds will do NOTHING... The Tribe is sovereign.
Have you ever wondered about some of the worthless property that the Tribe buys up for millions upon millions of dollars? Just where does the end trail for this money lead(i.e. is someone or a relative of someone selling it back to the Tribe at huge profits)?
With no outside audits, there can be just about anything going on. Imagine, millions upon millions of dollars, and no accountability for where it is going. Oh wait, they have the yearly meeting where they go over the books with the general membership (as if they are going to catch any funny business going on).
I was interested in the old roles of about 20 or so years back. Before the Moratorium and casino.
I'm sure it's not current but aamokat haven't you referred to a list you have that shows each families ancestor?
Yes, it is the list of the 1979 enrollees, from the first written enrollment.
But I think it would be interesting to get the official lists over the years since then as we could see who was enrolled and then show that if some of them were adults after the moratorium was in place, that besides being a bogus unconstitutional law that it hasn't even been uniformally enforced.
Also, I would like to get the per capita lists to see if they do match up with those on the membership rolls to see if there is any credibility to the recent post on this blog that there are checks being cut for people who don't even exist.
Yes that would be interesting. Checks for ghosts. hmmmmm.
The 79 and later list would be great to see if maybe my uncles or even grandmother was enrolled and I never knew it, then maybe some people could be enrolled under the law of only children of enrolled members. Interesting thought.
sanjuanflorist
sanjuanflorist, I remember awhile back that when I looked at that list that while there are people who were enrolled from the Guavaish line, that they are from another branch of that line.
Still if you are a direct descedant of an original person, then you have a rightful place in the tribe regardless if your direct ancestors were ever in or not.
The constitution and bylaws says a break in the linage is from someone's ancestor joining another tribe and it doesn't say anything else about the subject.
There is something in the enrollment committee procedures or from the Record of Decision against the Hunters and the M. Mirandas that a break is from disenrollment as well but that wouldn't apply to you.
So even though the enrollment committee may try to claim that if someone from your direct line of descent was never enrolled, they wouldn't have a leg to stand on legally, that is if they followed their own rules.
But since when do they do that?
Unfortunantly the usual practice is keeping people out and kicking peoople out of the tribe.
Thanks for that. I was actually hoping that say Michella or one of her brothers line, while probably not enrolling since that was well over 100 years ago, would want to know me.
If Michella's father, Felcustio, has any children enrolled, maybe they have photo of her, her burial location, etc...
For me its finding out about family, new and old.
I heard that Mary Ann might be buried at plot 33 at Pechanga, could that be true and verified???
Thanks so much, would love to meet you one day
sanjuanflorist
This coming from a man that declared The State recognized but not federally recognized Coastal Band of the Chumash nation to not be Chumash even thought they are related to the Santa Ynez (closed enrollment) reservation members. I think he picks and chooses who he wants to recognize.
Guess I should have said, No longer federally recognized. Mr. Johnson didn't help them any in trying to get re-recognized. Aparently not that anyone cares.
Thank you Dr. Johnson for standing up to those who hired you.
I believe the Macarros should look closer since they are related to this line ... but we all know that it wasn't about descent, it was about politics.
From Wikipedia CDIB:
Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood or Certificate of Degree of Alaska Native Blood (both abbreviated CDIB) is an official U.S. document that certifies an individual possesses a specific degree of Native American blood of a federally recognized Indian tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community.[1] They are issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs after the applicant supplies a completed genealogy with supporting legal documents such as birth certificates, showing their descent, through one or both birth parents, from an enrolled Indian or an Indian listed in a base roll such as the Dawes Rolls. Blood degree cannot be obtained through adoptive parents.[1] The blood degree on previously issued CDIBs or on the base rolls in the filer's ancestry are used to determine the filer's blood degree (unless they challenge them as inaccurate). Information collected for the filing is held confidential by privacy laws, except if the CDIB is related to assigned duties.[1]
A CDIB can show only the blood degree of one tribe or the total blood degree from all tribes in the filer's ancestry. Some tribes require a specific minimum degree of tribal ancestry for membership, which might require the first type of certificate, while some federal benefits programs require a minimum total Indian blood degree so an individual might require the second type of certificate to qualify. For example, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians requires at least 1/16 degree of Eastern Cherokee blood for tribal membership, the Bureau of Indian Affairs' Higher Education Grant for college expenses requires a 1/4 degree minimum.[2]
A Certificate Degree of Indian Blood does not establish membership in a tribe. Tribal membership is determined by tribal laws and may or may not require a CDIB or may require a separate tribal determination of ancestry or blood degree.[3]
The CDIB is controversial, both from a race politics perspective, in general, and in particular, because non-federally recognized tribes are not eligible for the card nor for the benefits which require one. Some groups such as the Freedman, descendants of black slaves who may be eligible for tribal membership are often not eligible for a CDIB because they are not Indian by blood or their degree of blood was not recorded in the base rolls (where Freedman was used instead of stating a degree).[4]
What year did this start because Paulina Hunter was listed on Census Records from the before the inception of the Temecula Indian Reservation aka Pechanga as Head of Household=100% Temecula Indian.
Just so happens that Mateo, Paulina’s father, was born at Pechanga... Ironic because he was the only one recorded at this place of birth in the surviving Pardons from the San Luis Rey Mission.
http://www.nbc4.tv/news/11067511/dehttp://www.nbc4.tv/news/11067511/detail.html
nbc4.tv
Without A Tribe
TEMECULA, Calif. -- NBC4 reports on a battle that's brewing on Indian
reservations across the country.
Following is a verbatim script from the on-air report
Colleen Williams, NBC4 News: The commercial you just saw was paid for by
the Pechanga Tribal Council in direct response to the story you're about to
see. We believe the commercial contains misleading information. It's our
understanding that the U.S. and California supreme courts denied review of
the Pechanga case. So neither court heard the merits of any case involving
Pechanga membership. And the individuals specifically discussed in our
report have not been involved in any state or federal court proceedings.
This all revolves around an internal battle being waged on Indian
reservations across the country. Thousands of Indians are being kicked out
of tribes. Critics say it's more about greed than anything else. The tribes
say it's about preserving their lineage.
Williams: For decades the Madariaga family called this home -- the Pechanga
reservation in Temecula. Eighty-nine-year-old Lawrence and his wife Sophie
built their house after he came back from serving in World War II. They
raised four children, eight grandchildren and twelve great grandchildren.
Della Freeman, Disenrolled Pechanga Indian: I grew up here my whole life.
This is my home. This is who I am. This is the only thing I know.
Everything I've ever wanted to do in my life is for my people.
Williams: This is the ancestral home of the Luiseno Indian Tribe, and the
Madariagas say they can trace their family roots here, back more than 100
years.
Williams: Ok, what is this that we're coming up on?
Lawrence Madariaga: The clinic, that's my design.
Williams: Lawrence and Sophie say early life on the reservation was hard,
and the tribe lived in poverty. Today, though, because of Indian gaming --
specifically, the Pechanga resort and casino in Temecula -- those days of
poverty are gone. The tribe as a whole, shares in the profit, meaning each
and every adult member of the tribe receives a monthly check worth
thousands of dollars.
Madariaga: We used to get $20,000 a month.
Williams: A monthly allowance of $20,000?
The Madariaga family says last August that monthly allowance abruptly
stopped. The family was cut off. The term they use is disenrolled. It means
Lawrence Madariaga his wife and all their children and their children’s
children were kicked out of the tribe.
Ronnett Hernandez, Larry's Daughter: They shun you totally, that's what
disenrollment means, you're outcasts.
Williams: They say the children in the family were even kicked out of the
reservation school.
Akeva Mckever: Disenrolled Pechanga Indian: My daughter, who was 5, and my
son, who was 8, they escorted them out and told us that we are never
allowed to come back here.
Williams: While the disenrollment is still emotionally painful for the
family, financially it has left them scrambling to make ends meet. The
Madariaga family alone had 90 adult members, each receiving that monthly
allowance of $20,000
Williams: Does that mean the money that's left, the other families get a
bigger piece of the pie?
Hernandez: Yes, but our issue here again is our heritage, our heritage. We
always knew who we were; my father always taught us who we were.
Williams: The Madariagas are the second family recently disenrolled at
Pechanga -- bringing the total number at this one reservation to over 220
adults.
What relation are you again to Paulina Hunter?
Madariaga: Her great grandson.
Williams: The Madariagas trace their family roots back to a woman by the
name of Paulina Hunter. In fact, Hunter Lane is one of the first streets
you notice as you drive onto the Pechanga reservation.
There's no doubt this 20 acres in the middle of the Pechanga Reservation
were deeded to Paulina. They have the paperwork to prove it, from the
1890s, signed by President McKinney. But there is some question about
whether Paulina Hunter was in fact a Temecula Indian.
In a letter dated May 3, 2005, the Pechanga enrollment committee asked the
family to provide documentation to show their family’s "chain of lineal
descent" to prove tribal membership.
That same enrollment committee even hired a renowned anthropologist to
trace the family's history, but they may have been surprised by what he
found.
Dr. John Johnson: Paulina Hunter descended from Luiseno Indians that were
living there at Pechanga in the late 19th Century.
Williams: Dr. John Johnson has spent 40 years tracing Indian ancestry.
Johnson: She's definitely Pechanga Indian, 100 percent.
Williams: So you were hired by the tribe itself, you found in favor of the
family and the tribe still voted to disenroll?
Johnson: Yes. There is no one today who has more of a right to be a
Pechanga Indian than that family.
Williams: For four months we tried repeatedly to set up a meeting or an
interview with the tribal leaders here at Pechanga to talk about the
disenrollment process. Just yesterday (Wednesday) they finally agreed to
talk with Channel 4 about their position.
Mark Marcarro is the tribal chairman for the Pechanga tribe.
Mark Marcarro: This has never been about money. This is about the integrity
of tribal citizenship here at Pechanga. If there was a cornfield instead of
a casino, these same challenges would have taken the same path to the same
conclusion.
Williams: Marcarro admits the tribal enrollment committee hired Dr. Johnson
as an independent expert but choose not to go with his findings.
Williams: Let me tell you what he told us: "Paulina Hunter, she is
definitely a Pechanga Indian, 100 percent, for sure."
Marcarro: As was reported to me, there was a percentage figure of
estimation, and it was 90 percent ... and it was regarded as nonconclusive
... and, again, let me state that courts have affirmed that not
anthropologists but tribes themselves have the responsibility to maintain
the integrity. Only tribes know their own history.
As a legal matter this case is closed and the courts have moved on and the
tribe have moved on.
Williams: Indian reservations are considered self-regulating and sovereign.
Madariaga: It's been abused by the people in power to go after their own
people.
Williams: And its not just happening here. Over 2,000 Indians have been
disenrolled across the country in recent years.
Carla Forman Maslin, Disenrolled Member, Redding Rancheria Tribe:
Seventy-six members of my family were disenrolled.
Vicky Schenandoah, Disenrolled Member, Oneida Tribe: It happened when the
casino came. We held a protest and because of that we were all
disenfranchised. One third of our population.
Laura Weiss: Gaming, that's the thing the common ground. Greed, money. It's
an endless, huge, huge pot of gold.
Williams: Laura Weiss heads the non-profit Indian Legacy center. She
worries disenrollments will destroy Indian tribes.
Weiss: Except for the forced extermination by the Federal Government during
the 1850s this is the biggest thing that's ever hit us.
Williams: Weiss is drafting new federal legislation she hopes will better
protect individual Indians and help set standards for tribal enrollment.
Madariaga: That's the church, that's the old church, yes.
Williams: Lawrence Madariaga earned a lifetime achievement award from the
tribe just months before he and his family were disenrolled.
Madariaga: They are very honest people here at one time. Now we call them
casino people, because they are getting the money. They’re not like they
use to be.
Williams: For the record, the Madariaga family has not filed a lawsuit.
Also, tribal chairman Mark Marcarro says while two families were
disenrolled, another three were challenged and found to be of Pechanga
decent. At this time, he says no other disenrollments are pending. The
Redding Rancheria and Oneida Tribes had no comment for this report.
The name is: Laura Wass.
Paulina Hunter was BOTH "Pechanga and Temecula,"NOW, that's what the professional John Roberts, Anthropologist Concluded... NOW, if The Temecula band of Luisseno Mission Indians at the tribe, CLAIM THAT THEY ARE NOT~ Then There "IGNORANT", and Need Big Glasses so THEY NEED TO SEE THE LIGHT"...And need to Step down there Greedy Wayz, Asses and Mules, like That Fraud Allen Lawson.who needs mental help..This Dis-enrolling TRUE INDIANS is getting out of hand... Yall Dont Claim: ITS NOT my Business...
I was baptized at San Luis Rey, but Im a Kumeyaay Native from San Pasqual who believes in "justice for all...not just Ourselves". lord forbid! "NATIVE AMERICANS DO NOT FIGHT ALONE.!...we bringing the WOLVES.."WOOF!
The #truth is Paulina Hunter was allotted land on the Pechanga Reservation in 1897 , she was recognized by the Federal Government and ALL current members of the band. According to custom and tradition All people who can prove your related to a recognized member of the band can enroll. During open enrollment a lot of Paulina Hunters decedents became members of the band and participated for over 30yrs. of tribal membership. A lot of members are related and our Ancestors know the facts. NOONE should ignore the facts, and we should honor ALL members.
Was John Hunter Miller reenstated? My Aunt was married to him. He was dis-enrolled after he died. Just wondering. Thanks for the update.
No, John Miller and his descendants are considered, at least by the current regime, to not be Pechanga tribal members as no direct descendants of Paulina Hunter have been reinstated.
WOW...ALL I CAN SAY IS WOW!! IVE NEVER SEEN THIS LETTER JUST HEARD ABOUT WHAT HAPPEN WITH THE ANTHROPOLOGIST THEY HIRED AND FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE FAMILY AND THEY STILL DISENROLLED. WHEN HE STATES THE PICKED OUT THE 1928 ROLL STATEMENTS OF THE GRANDSON ABOUT "SAN LUIS REY" INDIANS AS THEIR REASONING FOR DISENROLLMENTS WHEN ALL PECHANGA PEOPLE ARE LISTED AS SAN LUIS REY SHOWS THEY PICK AND CHOSE WHAT THEY WANT TO USE TO GET THE OUTCOME THEY WANT. PLEASE HAVE THIS POSTED IN THE PRESS ENTERPRISE AND OTHER LOCAL NEWSPAPERS TO SHOW THIS IS WHAT TRIBAL GAMING HAS BECOME AND FOR PEOPLE NOT TO ATTEND THE CASINOS THAT DISENROLL.
The Anthropological report stated Paulina Hunters father was the only record he could find of someone being born at Pechanga. Maybe they disenrolled your family because your family is really the only one that claim ancestry to Pechanga having the only family line of the only person born at Pechanga and they got rid of you before you found out and got rid of everyone else. You think with all the new money coming in these tribal councils didn't start doing more thorough background checks on their tribes and it's members. Then they find out what they don't like and get rid of the families that have the most claim. I know at Pala after those disenrollments all kinds of evidence and reports starting coming out and the Brittains are the only ones the BIA and interior investigated for years in the 80's and was cleared as "Final Decision" M. Brittain was in fact FULLBLOOD Cupeno. A lot of other things about families in Pala came out that they shouldn't be enrolled like the Lugo's of which 3 sit on the council and their descendant was cahuilla and worked to bring down the Cupeno's from Warner springs to Pala and then said he was from there and got free land an allotment with the rest. Then his census records changed from cahuilla to Pala after 1903 when this happened. The Chairman Smith s this document about his father being a citizen Indian and giving up being native to get American citizens rights which disqualified his descendants from enrollment but they all still got enrolled. There are some others that just switched tribes when Pala got a casino and theirs didn't which is always looked down upon. I'm sure this is not the case but it makes you think when these disenrolled families have to look so hard in their backgrounds only to find out they 100% should be members and then other families stuff starts to pop up bringing doubt. Many of the people that disenroll should not be opening that can of worms with their enrollment history.
Post a Comment