POLICE Magazine

JUN 2019

Magazine for police and law enforcement

Issue link: https://policemag.epubxp.com/i/1129771

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 8 of 124

6 POLICE JUNE 2019 STEPHON CL ARK was a troubled young man. And on the night of March 18, 2018, he was killed by two Sacramento police officers. e officers had been summoned to the scene by a report of someone burglarizing vehicles. When they arrived Clark led them on a foot pursuit into darkened backyards where the officers mistook his cellphone for a gun and opened fire. e Clark shooting enraged California's anti-police ac- tivists and their followers. ey protested, blocked streets, impeded fan access to the Sacramento Kings' arena on game nights, and they pushed for new legislation that would make it harder for police to justify deadly force. at legislation, Assembly Bill 931, authored by Assem- bly Members Shirley Weber and Kevin McCarty, was in- troduced more than a year before the Clark incident. But it gained momentum after the shooting and sparked contro- versy as the media started discussing that it would change the standard for justifying police deadly force from objectively reasonable to necessary. And here begins the story of how some of California's most liberal politicians and the state's police organizations reached a com- promise on two bills, one that provides more police training and the other that codifies the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings on when police can use force into state law. As originally drafted, AB 931 (reintroduced this year as AB 392) was very concerning for California law enforcement officers and the organizations that represent them. Of particular concern was the possibility that the "necessary" terminology in the legislation would open offi- cers up to judgment of split-second decisions by people with 20-20 hindsight. And that is exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Graham v. Connor was designed to prevent. Many officers in California also worried that the new legislation if voted into law would lead to officers endan- gering themselves and the public by hesitating to act. "… if you start making cops second-guess things, it's going to be a public safety nightmare," James Wheeler, vice president of the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, told the Los Angeles Times. Facing the possibility of what they viewed as a very problematic police use-of-force bill passing California's legislature and being signed into law, law enforcement or- ganizations began to push their own bill. California Senate Bill 230 was designed to codify Gra- ham v. Connor's objectively reasonable standard for law enforcement use of force. It also provided for additional training standards on use of force and de-escalation for California officers. e use-of-force elements in the Senate bill didn't sur- vive legislative committee. And that left the Assembly bill, the one with all the language that could have contradicted the objectively reasonable standard, as the only option for a legislature that wanted to rewrite California's use-of- force law, which was so out of date that it did not adhere to Tennessee v. Garner. Police organizations were not happy. ey started mak- ing even more noise about their opposition to AB 392. en a truly remarkable thing happened. e law en- forcement representatives and the author of the controver- sial use-of-force bill started to talk. And they came to an agreement. e author of AB 392 accepted language that adhered closer to Graham v. Connor and the police groups would no longer fight the bill. Last month the Los Angeles Police Pro- tective League (LAPPL) sent a message to its members stating that it and other police unions and associations in the state had with- drawn their opposition to AB 392. e LAPPL told its members that it had changed its stand on the legislation because it does not change the use-of-force standard from objectively reasonable to necessary. Author of AB 931 and AB 392 Assembly Member Shirley Weber of San Diego says compromise with law enforce- ment was her goal from the beginning. "I kept saying this bill will make it safe behind and in front of the badge," she told the Los Angeles Times. While Weber is satisfied with the new language in the bill, which was overwhelmingly approved by the Assem- bly late last month, some of the anti-police activists who supported her initial legislation are not happy. And some law enforcement organizations that with- drew their opposition to the bill are also not ecstatic about it. But that is the nature of compromise. AB 392 is expected to be approved by the state Senate and signed by the governor in the next month. SB 230, which requires more de-escalation training for officers and provides funding for that training, has passed the Senate. It is expected to be approved by the Assembly and signed into law by the governor this summer. Golden State politicians wanted to make "necessary" the standard for police to use deadly force, but they settled for "reasonable." DAVID GRIFFITH David.Griffith@PoliceMag.com Politicians and police organizations reached a compromise on two bills. THE CALIFORNIA COMPROMISE EDITORIAL PHOTO: KELLY BRACKEN

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of POLICE Magazine - JUN 2019