Man with no criminal record faces life in prison for flashing "gang sign" on Facebook

Aaron Harvey of San Diego has no criminal record but now finds himself being charged for conspiring with gang members. His crime? Flashing a “gang sign” in a Facebook photo.

“They told me that I was wanted for murders in the state of California,” Harvey said. “I laughed. I started laughing. I told ‘em, ‘You’ve got the wrong guy.’”

Harvey join another 14 men in the charges of conspiracy in the gang-related deaths of nine people from 2013 to 2014. Under an obscure California law, these men are being prosecuted on charges of benefiting from gang-related activity.

Among the men is rapper Tiny Doo, who prosecutors say benefited because sales of his album went up after the shootings. But the so-called benefit Harvey enjoyed is less concrete.

“They’re saying I benefited because my stature, my respect, went up,” Harvey said. “I didn’t even know I had any stature. I don’t understand how someone can benefit from something they don’t even know exists.”

Watch Harvey discuss police stops in his neighborhood (video from Reporting San Diego)

Superior Court Judge David McGill has already dismissed charges against several defendants, and both Harvey and Tiny Doo will ask for similar dismissal in a hearing on March 16.

“If the district attorney wins this case, and I am convicted of crimes I didn’t commit or have any knowledge of, not only will my life change forever, but so may the lives of every young person who had been wrongly documented as a member of a gang,” Harvey said.

“This is not the American justice system. We attach personal liability to things. You’re not guilty by mere association or mere membership,” said Edward Kinsey, Harvey’s lawyer. “It’s just wrong. If they can get away with this, I fear for our future as free citizens.”

“This is as draconian a conspiracy law as you’ll see anywhere in the United States,” said Robert Weisberg, a professor at Stanford Law School and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center. “It exploits it to the absolute maximum, but it’s not unconstitutional. It’s just unbelievably tough.”