Republish
Deadly force law finally changed
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Deadly force law finally changed
Share this:
The record of the 2019 legislative session – Gov. Gavin Newsom’s first – is still a work in progress, but his signature on Assembly Bill 392 this week makes it a success, no matter what else happens.
The measure, creating a tighter standard for use of deadly force by police, was long overdue. Officers almost never faced legal consequences for killing suspects.
An 1872-vintage state law, still on the books, made virtually any use of deadly force legal. Later U.S. Supreme Court rulings declared such blanket exemptions “constitutionally unreasonable,” but if an officer had a reasonable rationale, deadly force was acceptable.
Under the latter legal test, prosecutors have been hesitant to charge officers and civil rights advocates pushed to change it after a couple of particularly egregious police killings of black men in Sacramento, both within a few miles of the state Capitol.
Two Sacramento police officers fired 20 shots at the shadowy figure of 22-year-old Stephon Clark in the backyard of his grandmother’s home on March 18, 2018, hitting him seven times.
Clark was being chased because of reports he was breaking windows in the neighborhood and the two cops apparently mistook a cellphone in Clark’s hand for a gun in the dark and unleashed the barrage of pistol fire.
In some ways, however, the death of 51-year-old Joseph Mann, a mentally ill and homeless man, nearly two years earlier, was even less justified because it occurred in broad daylight and Mann, carrying a knife and acting erratically, did not pose any immediate threat.
Mann was shot 14 times by two Sacramento officers who, it was revealed later, had tried to run down Mann with their patrol car. When he dodged out of the way, they radioed, “We’ll get him. We’ll get him,” then stepped from their car and almost immediately began shooting from a distance of at least 25 feet.
Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a black woman raised in the South who had long championed civil rights issues, assembled a powerful political coalition to confront police unions which had long resisted changing deadly force law. The families of police shooting victims added their voices in public appeals for change.
Weber, a San Diego Democrat, enlisted Newsom and legislative leaders in the cause and intense negotiations finally resulted in a version of AB 392 that the police unions would not actively oppose.
Basically, it changes the legal rationale for deadly force from a “reasonable” fear to, as a legislative analysis puts it, “only when necessary in defense of human life” as determined by “the particular circumstances of each case.”
Thus it moves the law closer to the standard applied to civilians. There’s little doubt that had civilians shot Clark and Mann under the same circumstances, they would have been prosecuted for homicide.
How the law is applied is still uncertain. Eventually, the courts will set the parameters of “necessary in defense of human life” just as they established the reasonable rationale.
During Monday’s signing ceremony, Weber said the legislation “basically changes the culture of policing in California” and “will make everyone in California safer.”
Pointedly, Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg was on hand and said Clark’s shooting death was “an unacceptable tragedy” and “one more is one more too many.”
AB 392 actually passed the Legislature in early July, but Newsom’s signature was delayed until August 19, a date with special significance – the 400th anniversary of the first African slaves being brought to North America.
Symbolism? Yes, but in this case quite justified.
Dan WaltersOpinion Columnist
Dan Walters is one of most decorated and widely syndicated columnists in California history, authoring a column four times a week that offers his view and analysis of the state’s political, economic,... More by Dan Walters