Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Pechanga Custom and Oral tradition

Most recently before his death, Antonio Ashman in a sworn affidavit said he knew Paulina as a member of the Band. He also swore that Paulina stayed at the home of Michelle and Salvador Quiliq and heard they were related. He also stated Paulina was called Aunt by Martin Berdugo, another recognized member of Pechanga. This is recorded oral recognition that the CPP faction says Paulina Hunter did not have.

The enrollment committee also finds that Paulina was given a land allotment on the Pechanga reservation as a Temecula Indian. This confirms Paulina’s status as a Temecula Indian.

The record of decision regarding the descendants of Paulina Hunter says that because John Miller under the Act of May 18, 1928 (45 Stat. L 602), a direct descendant of Paulina Hunter states that his Grandmother “was allotted as a Pechanga Mission Indian, but his Grandmother and Great Grandparents were of the San Luis Rey Mission Indians.”

This statement somehow outweighs hundreds of other documents the enrollment committee has possession of detailing the Hunters as recognized members of the Pechanga band by tribal elders who were alive at the time the reservation was established.

If this reasoning stands true, then the following people have the same problems as the Hunters and should be held to the same standards.

1928 Application Blood Pechanga Descendant

Salazar, Petronilla ---San Luiseno Frances Miranda

Leyva, Maximinio ----Mission- San Luis Rey
Ruth Masiel
Irene Scearce
Jennie Miranda
Raymond Basquez

Casas, Louisa Ayal----- Full blood San Luiseno

Bobbie LaMere


'aamokat said...

I must have posted a thousand times that Article V of the Pechanga constitution says that indvidual tribal members' rights are to be upheld without malice or predjudice.

So why not a thousand and one times?

So why were Ruth Masiel, Irene Scearce, Jennie Miranda, Raymond Basquez and their famliy cleared from disenrollment when a member of their family put San Luis Rey on his 1928 application and why were the Hunters disenrolled for this reason?

Also, why was Frances Miranda and her family cleared from disenrollment when a member of their family did likewise?

And why wasn't Bobbie Lamere's family investigated for disenrollment if their family member didn't put Pechanga on a 1928 application?

Can we say malice or predjudice against the Hunters?

The whole San Luis Rey reference is absurd anyway as other Hunter family members put Pechanga on their 1928 applications so it is clear that the terms were historically interchangable.

Besides, some of the censuses call the reservation the Temecula Reservation-San Luis Rey Tribe in some of the records of the late 1800s.

But if a member of one's family putting San Luis Rey on a 1928 application proves a family is not Pechanga, which the enrollment committee claimed in its Record of Decision against the Hunters, then all of the above mentioned people and their whole extended families should be disenrolled.

After all, fair is fair.

Anonymous said...


'aamokat said...

By the way, the Pechanga tribe is officially called the "Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians" in the preamble of the Band's constitution and bylaws.

The Band is also called the "Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, Pechanga Reservation" in both the official seal and on the title page of the Band's constitution and bylaws.

So again the San Luis Rey reference is absurd especially since the term Luiseno refers to the Indians of the San Luis Rey Mission.

Anonymous said...

I think you all need to go public with your issues. You need to start going on National Television in a professional manner with all of your proof and state your case to the world. Oh,and never shut up about it! Try Oprah, Geraldo, or maybe even that campbell Brown show on CNN. In order to be considered legitimate, you have to have people that will speak up and not be ashamed or afraid of reprecussion. You guys can do it so get started and start calling these shows, all of them, one should pick your story up. Nobody is going to help if you don't help yourselves. And, nobody is going to hear you if you keep everything on your personal blogs and on the down-low. SPEAK UP, LET US ALL HEAR OF THIS CONTROVERSY!!!

Luiseno said...

Some people may wonder just why so much importance is put on Antonio Ashman statement that he remembered Paulina Hunter as a member of the Band.

Under the constitution and bylaws, one way that is accepted as proof enough to allow enrollment to the Tribe is if a recognized elder of the Tribe states that he knows you as a member of the Band.

A second reason Under the constitution and bylaws, that is accepted as proof enough to allow enrollment to the Tribe is if you are a direct decedent of an original allotee (something the enrollment committee dose not dispute)

This one piece of evidence should have been enough to stop the disenrollment, irregardless of the tons of other evidence provided.

Luiseno said...

Oh yeah I almost forgot, another thing that should have stopped our disenrollment is that disenrollment NO LONGER EXISTED in Pechanga law. Disenrollment had been removed from Pechanga law a year before we were disenrolled.

Anonymous said...

The reason some Indians put San Luis Rey is because ALL Indians in that area were under the jurisdiction of the San Luis Rey Mission.

A comparable analogy might be made to a similar situation such as...

What if someone were to state that you were not really an Californian Citizen because one of your distant relatives put on his birth certificate that he/she was an American Citizen.


The Drip "Source of Life"

Think NDN