Saturday, July 16, 2011

Anatomy of Pechanga Tribal Corruption: Let's Have a WITCH HUNT started by a LIE

Cousin Luiseno laid out how a "witch hunt" was started by a lie, perpetrated by Yolie McCarter and Basquez Crime Family Members.   The lies were easily disproved which should have halted all disenrollment activity.   Please read.

There were several statements that were stated as "fact" in the letter provided to the enrollment committee. This "information" was said to be enough to start the disenrollment process going.

1). They stated as a "fact" that a search of the public record revealed that Paulina Hunter never lived on the reservation, and that she was not on any of the reservation census records.

This statement is so silly and foolish I don't understand why the enrollment committee even gave it any weight at all. As a search of the public record revealed to the committee that she not only lived on the reservation, but that she was on all the census records until her death, recorded as a Temecula/Pechanga Indian.

2) Also stated as "fact" that public records found no evidence that Paulina Hunter had no Indian ancestry, much less Pechanga Temecula Indian ancestry (they stated that she was some white woman from Ohio) has also been PROVEN as WRONG, not only by certified documents showing her on the Indian census rolls for Temecula Pechanga for many years from 1893 until her death in 1899, but by deposition given by Dolores Tortuga and Jose David Rodriguez in 1915 that they knew her as a member of the tribe. I won't even address that the person THEY hired, they hired not us, also came to the conclusion that she was 100% Temecula/Pechanga Indian.

3). The deposition given by one of the oldest members of the Pechanga tribe Antonio Ashman in 1979 that he knew Paulina Hunter to be a member of the Band should not be taken lightly. As our chairman stated so well in the tribal meeting on June 2005 we should listen to elders when they say something, and when someone as old and respected like Antonio Ashman speaks we should listen (our chairman's own words).

The CPP repeatedly state that it is oral tradition of tribal recognition not written documents (of which we have provided in abundance), they say oral unless the person who gives the oral statement is dead or disagrees with there own stand.

The Hunter Family has been members of the Pechanga Band from its very beginnings, even before they were forced to relocate to the area known as Pechanga. We were members in the Original Temecula Village before the relocation to the area known as Pechanga (this is easily verified from official certified documents on file).   It has only been recently that the Hunter family has been put into question by a very small minority in the tribe.

You might ask me if its a very few why hasn't the rest of the tribe put a stop to it. Well they did try a little over a year ago, in the largest gathering of our tribe in history they voted to STOP the disenrollment of the Hunter Family and to remove the disenrollment process from tribal law. Well this so shocked the small minority who had been trying to wrest control of the tribe from its members that they canceled all meetings for the next few months, and in secret behind closed and locked doors decided to overthrow the Tribes vote and continue with the disenrollment process. Once they had the Hunter family out they now have pretty much insured there control and takeover of the tribe as they further pad tribe membership with those new members whom they secretly enroll who will agree with there agenda.

How can they disenroll the Hunters when there was no disenrollment process in Tribal law? It was almost a year after the Tribe voted to end all disenrollment processes, and remove it from Tribal law that we were disenrolled.

It seems to me that since there was no disenrollment process in Tribal law, and it was voted to make it illegal to disenroll anyone (the disenrollment of the Hunters coming almost a year after this was passed into Tribal law) that this would make there disenrollment ILLEGAL.


'aamokat said...

When Hunter family members brought the notarized signed deposition of Antonio Ashman to the enrollment committee that was taken prior to the first open enrollment in 1979 in which Mr. Ashman said he knew Paulina Hunter as a member of the Band, three members of the committee, Irehne Sceare, Ruth Masiel, and Francis Miranda, refused to acknowledge that it had been submitted as evidence.

This document was acknowledged as evidence by the other members of the committee but in the Record of Decision against the Hunters it is referred to as, "regarding recognition" but even though other documents submitted by current tribal elders were listed as being either for the Hunters membership or against their membership, this key document clearly supported their membership and should have, in addition to the other testimony in their support, answered any questions any reasonable people may have had about the Hunters truly belonging or not.

Because if the statement that Mr. Ashman made, that he remembered Paulina Hunter as a member of the Band, had been quoted in the ROD it would have contradicted the conclusion of the ROD that Paulina wasn't a member of the Band.

The enrollment committee in the ROD said they could disregard any evidence if it was contradicted by other more credible evidence.

So what was more credible?

1. vaunted elder (called so on Pechanga's own official Website) Antonio Ashman who lived in the historical period of the late 1800's who knew who was and who wasn't an original tribal member, who said when he was asked, "do you you remember Paulina Hunter as a member of the Band?" Answered, "yes, I knew her as such."

2. Elder Dolores Tortuga, who also lived in the historical period of the late 1800s, who said when she was asked during the 1915 probate, "did you know or were you aquainted with the deceased PECHANGA INDIAN allottee Paulina Hunter during her lifetime?" said, "yes, I knew her as a neighbor when WE PECHANGA INDIANS lived on the Pauba Ranch near Temecula, Caifornia." which was backed up by elder Jose David Rodriguez who added he knew her as a neighbor on the original reservation.


1. People alive now who stated in their initial challenge to the Hunters membership that Paulina Hunter wasn't on any of the reservation census records of the late 1800's, a statement made either without checking the historial records or a bold faced lie, take your pick.

2. Elders alive now, all from the CPP faction of the tribe, who stated that the Hunters were never recognized as a members of the Band that was contradicted by other current elders not from the CPP faction of the tribe who said they have always considered the Hunters as legitimate tribal members.

By the way, in the supplement for the original written enrollment application of 1978 two of the ways listed as proving tribal membership included a recognized tribal member vouching for an applicant, which was met by Antonio Ashman's endorsement and being a direct lineal descendant of an original allottee, which the Hunters also are.

Anonymous said...

You can't sue the Tribe because of Sovereignty but you can sue the Government "BIA" Find a Law Firm that would bring a case for the Hunter family to be heard about the illegal disenrollment and why BIA let this happen and did nothing and removed them from Indian Rolls.
Go to Washington DC with your Lawyers and get legal help to prove your case Tribal Enrollment
process was not done by their own Sovereignty laws making Pechanga's Tribal Government illegal. Can't run a Casino with corruption. Don't give up, make it be heard how the Tribal Council is wrongdong.

Luiseno said...

I remember one of the Chairman's favorite sayings after a vote was taken "The will of the people has spoken". But when the vote to remove disenrollment from Tribal Law and make it illegal to disenroll anyone (including the Hunter Clan) was taken and passed overwhelmingly by the General Membership, our wonderful Chairman didn't make his cute little statement. Instead he stormed out of the meeting hall. He was so angry he no longer had control of the voting membership. And using his heavily armed hired thugs, hid himself behind locked doors canceled further General Membership meetings, and came to the conclusion that his will trumped the General Membership's and disenrolled us anyways.

Anonymous said...

LITTLE TEMECULA RANCHO, five or six miles southeast of the present town of Temecula, is today a pleasant piece of California real estate. It always has been. When Governor Pio Pico in 1845 granted its 2,283 acres to Pablo Apis, chief of the Temecula Indians, the Indians had reason to believe that here, at least, was one parcel of ground that would always be Indian.

Old Spanish law provided a measure of protection to the Indians, insisting that the natives' rights to the lands upon which they lived be recognized. When the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed in 1848 between the United States and Mexico, the United States agreed to recognize land ownership as it had been before the American conquest.

To carry out the terms of this agreement a United States Land Commission was created to determine boundaries of grants made by Mexico, and to pass upon the validity of claims to such lands. This spelled the doom of Little Temecula Rancho as a haven for Indians, although nearly twenty years were to pass before the full effects of the commission's actions became apparent.

On January 5, 1852, a "Treaty of Peace and Friendship" between the United States government and various Indian tribes was signed at the village of Temecula on Little Temecula Rancho. The treaty provided for large grants of lands to the Indians, including land along the Temecula River where the Temecula Indians had always made their home. For a while the Indians were jubilant, but their new hope was short lived. Almost exactly six months later the treaty was rejected in the United States Senate.

ALARMED, and in order to secure a patent to his land, Pablo Apis engaged E. O. Crosby as his attorney. The claim was presented to the land commissioners during that same year and, on November 15, 1853, the commissioners denied the claim. There was nothing, they said, to prove in what part of Temecula Valley Little Temecula Rancho was located.

Anonymous said...

In spite of this setback Indians continued to live on the diminutive rancho. The Apis adobe home, surrounded by other Indian homes, with Magee's store as the village meeting center, continued to form the principal part of Temecula. The village was growing in importance, with immigrants from the East continually passing through on their way to Los Angeles and the gold fields in the North. The Temecula Indians, however, did not join in the migration. This was their home. They had always lived here and here they would stay.
But the Indians, in their determination to stay, had failed to reckon with the boundless energy and all-consuming desire for land by an influx of new settlers.
Immediately following the Land Commission's denial of the Apis claim to his land, Little Temecula Rancho fell into private hands. Still the Indians continued to live in their homes and to watch the passage of immigrant wagons. With little outward signs of interest they witnessed the arrival of the first Butterfield stage in 1858 and the departure of the last overland coach three years later.'
With the stages operating, and with a post office established at Temecula, land in the valley became more to be desired. Some of the settlers looked about and found that Indians were making their homes and farming on land to which they could show no title. On April 15, 1869, action was brought in the District Court in San Francisco seeking a Decree of Ejection of the Indians. The action, brought by Temecula Valley ranchers against "Andrew .Johnson, Thaddeus Stevens, Horace Greeley and one thousand Indians and other parties whose names are unknown," was designed as "a bill to quiet title" and an action to recover possession of certain real estate.
One wonders why President Andrew Johnson, Radical Republican Leader Thaddeus Stevens, and Horace Greeley, founder of the New York Tribune, were named in the action. Could the plaintiffs have been nursing a grudge against these three Northern leaders in the recent War Between the States?
The court made no effort to eject the President and his two friends, all three of whom were across the continent in Washington, but it did say the Indians must go.
THE TIME of the Indians on Little Temecula Rancho was limited. In 1875 the San Diego County sheriff and a posse of men showed up to move the Indians Among members of the posse have been named Louis Wolf, José Gonzales, Juan Murrieta and his associate, Francisco Sanjurgo.
Details of the eviction of the Temecula Indians are today clouded in a cloak of misty dimness. When the Cupeño Indians were evicted from Kupa at Warner Springs thirty years later, the action was witnessed by newspaper reporters and cameramen who have handed the story down through the years. But the Temecula Indians had no publicity agent. The sheriff and his posse are dead. The evicted Indians are dead. Only the land remains. There are, however, a few accounts that have been preserved and handed down.

Anonymous said...

In 1882, seven years after the eviction, a woman writer, championing the cause of American Indians, visited Temecula and talked with many of those who had been moved from Little Temecula Rancho. The writer was Helen Hunt Jackson, and her interview with the Temecula Indians occurred two years before publication of Ramona, the novel that brought her lasting fame. Details of her interview, however, were not published until 1885---the year of her death---and then under the by-line of "H.H.," a by-line she frequently used.

Mrs. Jackson wrote that the first impulse of the Indians upon learning the court's decision was to resist. Friends, however, reasoned with them and pointed out that resistance would be useless, that force would be used if necessary---even to the point of shooting any who chose to resist.

Finally, Mrs. Jackson wrote, convinced of the hopelessness of their position, the Indians sat on the ground, some weeping, some sullenly silent, and watched while their possessions were brought from their homes and loaded on wagons. They could go anywhere they chose, Mrs. Jackson wrote, so long as they did not choose land belonging to white men.

It took three days to move the Indians, who walked behind the wagons clutching in their arms small household items. Loaded on the wagons were tule roofs from their adobe houses, for the roofs could be used again when new homes were built.

Most of the Indians, in order to remain as close as possible to their ancestral homes, chose to re-locate in a secluded little valley just to the south of Little Temecula Rancho.

Tony Ashman," who three years later was born into one of the evicted families and who is now ninety-six years old, five years ago told of the eviction as related to him by his parents. Leading the way to a brush-covered hill adjoining the little valley, Tony pointed and said: "They took them in wagons up on that hill and dumped them out . . . just dumped them and left them there! ... When they lived on the river at Little Temecula Rancho they had everything---sheep, goats, cattle. After they were driven out they gradually lost everything because they bad no pasture for their animals."

Anonymous said...

IN THEIR NEW HOME the exiled Indians built huts of reeds and straw. A booth of boughs was set tip for the priest who came on occasion to say mass. A graveyard was established, small plots of land were sown to wheat or barley, and a few small orchards were planted. A well was dug and water found.

The little settlement was vividly described by Mrs. Jackson. She told of huge baskets, woven of twigs, that were used for storage of wheat and acorns; of women carrying red pottery jars on their heads or backs as they brought water from the well; of old men carrying loads of sticks tied in bundles to be used as firewood, and of older women sitting on the ground making baskets.

During the year of 1885 the little valley where the Temecula Indians had made a new start became Pechanga Indian Reservation---so named for the little creek that, during rainy seasons, flows toward the Temecula River. Safe in their retreat the women again took up the art of lace-making taught to them during the years when the missions flourished. Most of the houses had frames hanging on the walls for making lace, and the product was said to be exquisitely beautiful.

THE YEARS HAVE PASSED. Most of the Indians who once lived on the Pechanga Reservation have moved away and blended into the white society that dominates the country surrounding the little valley. A recent census of Indian Reservations gave the population of 4,125-acre Pechanga as seventeen. It has been almost a century since the Temecula Indians were driven to their new home, yet there is little change in the appearance of the land, for the Indians have always venerated Mother Earth and have preferred not to change her.

Has changed since this time!


Anonymous said...

Nazi niggers need to be dis-enrolled from any of our tribes***we have those damned imposters, posing as tribal reservation indians, coonheaded nazis/negro plus german descent! The uglyiest mix of blended counterdictiing bunch of coon head nazis.

How about the russian mexican mix---notta lick of Indian blood^^^imposters?!?
The Maccarro mexican speck pickle pickers...Maccarro why, do the mexicans have taco belly breathe? Do you know why mexicans have jalapeno belly breathe coming up straight from your belly's, through your throats and then into the air and whom ever is near smells the same thing?
You see everyone whom is not mexican do not have that smell...especially coming from the pit of you alls freakin stinks...a few of the buddy's all have noticed when talking to the mexican...warm ass smell coming from their throats & smelly pukie things and your mexican belly stenchers!

Luiseno said...

I find it interesting that not one of the items on the list that was provided to us questioning our enrollment, items that we were told we needed documents to refute were used by the enrollment committee to disenroll us. We were informed also that after turning in our evidence, that they would not accept any evidence turned in later. So we were given this list of down right silly accusations, told that they would not accept any other information that was not provided in our initial turn in.

Then they turned around and disenrolled us not for any of the initial accusations, but for a whole new set of accusations, and we could not provide any new eidence to refute them.

Luiseno said...

On my last statement it should have read "we were not allowed to provide any new evidence", because obviously if allowed, those would have also been easily disproved.

Also concerning my brother Aamokat statement " two of the ways listed as proving tribal membership included a recognized tribal member vouching for an applicant... and being a direct lineal descendant of an original allottee " were ways listed as proving tribal membership. Those two facts alone should have ended the disenrollment process.

Anonymous said...

Anyone, who want to tell the story ours tribes nation !Please go to email is it will spread around the world and even white house there people will look ours tribes story! Hope work things out ! We all prayer for ours back where we belong it never end ever!

smokeybear said...


'aamokat said...

We, the descendants of Paulina Hunter, got our Record of Decision informing us we were kicked out of our tribe on March 16, 2006 eight months after the law that outlawed disenrollment and just two days after the tribe received a letter dated March 14, 2006 informing the membership that we were not included in the new law obviously time so we couldn't respond.

The tribal council claimed that the general membership could not overrule the enrollment committee on matters of enrollment or disenrollment that it violated tribal legal precedent and the council also claimed that the new law didn't change the membership requirements.

However there is no such legal precedent in fact the exact opposite is true as in 1986 the lineal descendants of Rose Murphy, after they were turned down for tribal membership by the enrollment committee, were taken in as tribal members when the general membership voted to overturn the committee's decision not to enroll them.

So if the tribe could overrule the committee to take in the family of Rose Murphy, including sitting councilman Russell Butch Murphy, then the people could and did overrule the committee on July 17, 2005 regarding disenrolling the Hunters .

Regarding whether we the Hunter meet the membership requirements a simple majority of the enrollment committee ignored every piece of evidence that supported our tribal memberhip and they rubberstamped their biased foregone conclusion that they were going to disenoll us based on hearsay so called evidence that met their agenda.

Anonymous said...

I dont see why the goverment couldnt move in under the Reco Act. They commited fraud under there own constitution and by laws for profit from a casino. if these tribes are turly goverments then breaking there own constution and by laws to commit crimes would be under the United States jurisdiction.

Anonymous said...

Hey Macarro brothers and you the Leivas family (Mexicans) were have you been, we have not heard from you. We saw you Mark walking around Pechanga days with your head down. What are you afraid something coming for you or are you counting the days. Tic Toc

Anonymous said...

I had a dream we took back the reservation shots were fired all hell broke loose,the police sit back and said we can't get involved. The fake people were arrested for murder.

Anonymous said...

Look everyone , chairman is mark and his wife holly they bothes paid tons of money to people to cover up everything you name bez he want to be stay chairman forever but it not allowed! Pauline hunter this is very truth no fake they made this up try confuse people what really are! they was sopposed finish with result DNA 45days ago what happen why they take so long? Bez they tried tore up our tribes nation history! They only way you can email to do for they will put up story to world and white house too!

Anonymous said...

what DNA test ? are you talking about? BEZ?

Anonymous said...

I don't understand the comment "he wants to be chairman forever but it not allowed." Why is it not allowed? As far as I know, the Chairman of Pechanga can run for office unlimited amounts of time. There is no term limits on that position.

Mark Macarro admired the Chairman of Soboba (until he was arrested?) and hopes for a long-reign also.

Anonymous said...

I am certain mark still admires the former Soboba leader. he was marks "mentor" in the early days of learning government.

They would make great cell mates....

I heard, before the last election, there was talk of bringing the Hunters back into the tribe. The thinking was that there would be a large enough vote to remove Mark from office. I bet that is what Mark was thinking when he got the rest to remove the Hunters. The deal breaker was that they did not want to pay restitutions for the illegal removal of the Hunter.

I say it should have been done, that way out with mark and in with anyone else..... I would not expect restitution to be witness to change.

Oh well maybe next time....


Anonymous said...

Mark wanted a retirement salary like the US congress before moving on.

Luiseno said...

"I heard, before the last election, there was talk of bringing the Hunters back into the tribe. The thinking was that there would be a large enough vote to remove Mark from office. I bet that is what Mark was thinking when he got the rest to remove the Hunters. The deal breaker was that they did not want to pay restitutions for the illegal removal of the Hunter."

I nor any of my family would have cared one iota for " restitution's ". We just want to be let joined back again where we so rightfully belong. To be made whole again after being torn asunder from our Tribe.

'aamokat said...

"I heard, before the last election, there was talk of bringing the Hunters back into the tribe. The thinking was that there would be a large enough vote to remove Mark from office. I bet that is what Mark was thinking when he got the rest to remove the Hunters. The deal breaker was that they did not want to pay restitutions for the illegal removal of the Hunter."

you stated it yourself, it was illegal when they disenrolled us so Mark didn't get the rest of the tribe to disenroll us as the people voted to outlaw disenrollment the year before we were disenrolled.

What he and the council did was to ignore the wishes of the people.

Reportedly John Mcgee, his opponent in the last election, only lost by about 100 votes.

Do the math, with us back, Mark loses.

Anonymous said...

What, I talked about DNA go websit tech/article-2004699/chukchansi-tribal-war-Indian-council and we vote mark two time then after that they vote someone but he won again that election was cheater again and again they don't want mark but he paid the person to do for him but all of them really want him out it was two year!

smokeybear said...


Anonymous said...

No Pechanga tribal meeting this month it is the third Sunday. What questions from the people is the council afraid off.