But then, the case took a strange and unexplained twist. Tamberg issued  a clarification. While no action has been taken on the May 17 disruption,  UCLA police did forward the videotape of the May 17 event to the city  prosecutor in connection with two previous unrelated cases, campus  sources say.

When asked again whether the “referral” to the police and prosecutors  had actually occurred, Tamberg clarified he was not referring to the May  17 SSI case, but to a separate incident on February 26, 2018, involving  Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who appeared at UCLA and was  briefly heckled by protestors who police forcibly removed and arrested.  After the Mnuchin incident, the protestors were served with a “stay away”  order, under Title 11, Sec 626.67 of the penal code which empowers  university personnel to administratively demand non-students stay off  campus. Jail time is prescribed for violators. Essentially, these are “campus  bans” backed by the force of law. In this case, a banned student from the  Mnuchin event returned for the March 5, 2018, appearance by former  intelligence officer Chelsea Manning, convicted of espionage. One banned  protestor was arrested on sight. While taking no action on the May 17  disruption against SSI, the university is using the May 17 video to bolster  prosecution efforts on the Mnuchin case.

Tamberg, in an email, confirmed, “There were no arrests, nor did anyone  file a police report or complaint regarding the May 17 disruption, hence  there was no police investigation. However, UCLA PD shared video of the  disruption with the L.A. city attorney, who is considering filing five  misdemeanor charges against individuals from off campus who disrupted  Treasury Secretary Mnuchin’s talk at UCLA on Feb. 26. That incident  resulted in a seven‐day stay away order against one of the off campus  arrestees, who was subsequently rearrested when that person showed up  at a talk by Chelsea Manning at UCLA on

March 5. UCPD sent video of the May 17 disruption to the L.A. city attorney  with the request that the city attorney consider the actions of May 17 in  deciding whether to file charges concerning the previous incidents of  Feb. 26 and March 5.”

Tamberg repeatedly declined to respond to questions about why the May  17 incident was not being investigated. UCLA police refused to answer  further questions, referring all inquiries to Tamberg. From all appearances, police decisions are not being controlled solely by the police, but also by  UCLA public relations. A senior UCLA police source explained, “we  coordinate with them closely.”

Lewin at Brandeis Center insisted, “If there is a criminal violation, it  should be investigated.”

While the attack against SSI has stalled, Jewish and pro-Israel  organizations are increasingly turning to the criminal code in matters  of extreme disruption.

When the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York staged its  June 3, 2018 Celebrate Israel, “We had six people, each paired with a  representative of the NYPD legal team,” says director Noam Gilboord.  He added, “This was primarily for disruption.” In this case, he reports,  “There were no major disruptions, no incidents, no arrests.” But Gilboord  says, “All assaults, disruption, and violence should be reported to the  proper authorities or law enforcement.” Other Jewish and pro-Israel  organizations echoed that sentiment.

However, in the case of the May 17, 2018 UCLA incident, no prosecution is pending because no one has reported it to the police, neither the  students nor the university.

Edwin Black is the New York Times bestselling author of IBM and the  Holocaust and Financing the Flames.

Pro-Israel Groups Pursue Criminal Aspects of Disruptions