Stephon Clark killed by Sacramento police - he was in his own family's backyard

[Derec]

It's Time to Stop Treating Every Fleeing Teenager Like a Crazed Killer

Stephon was 22. Not a teenager. And he has some sort of record - that much was admitted by the brother. Of course, the media is not doing their fucking job and releasing details of his criminal record preferring to tell us how great of a father he supposedly was. So we don't know if it was felonies or misdemeanors, violent or non-violent.

- - - Updated - - -

Wonderful. The Bill of Rights is hereby applied on a prorated basis based upon the average of your last three years' taxable income.

Who said anything approaching that?

- - - Updated - - -

The cops here may have had a reasonable fear for their life which turned out wrong. However, it is immensely important never to excuse incidents like this on the notion that the victim otherwise deserved it or was valueless to society. He may have been a worthless piece of shit. But for our justice system to work everyone must be treated equally. The lowest of the low enjoys the same rights and protections as the rest of us.

I don't disagree. But my comment was more about the coverage. "Was turning his life around" is a very common cliche in these police shootings.
Also, if he really was turning his life around, did he have gainful employment? And breaking into cars does not sound like somebody turning their life around.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for adding absolutely nothing relevant to the discussion.

Well it is certainly orders of magnitude more relevant than your usual MO of attacking the poster and not the issue.

 

[blastula]

From the video, it does seem the police (at least one of them) thought he did have a gun when they shot him. When they turn the corner it's, "Show me your hands!" Immediately followed by, "Gun, gun, gun!" He didn't have a gun. Whether it was suitably reasonable to think he did, I'm not sure. If this is considered a legal shooting, I do have contempt for a system that puts police lives so far above citizen lives, that they are authorized to pull the trigger when there's a way lower certainty of seeing a gun than beyond reasonable doubt. When in doubt, police lives come first.

 

[Derec]

Even if there was any evidence that Stephon Clark was the "suspect" they were looking for,

He was.

a cell phone looks nothing whatsoever like a gun or a crowbar.

In the dark, when the suspect is moving and when you have only a short time to make a decision whether to shoot. I don't think so.

(The two police officers changed their stories as to which they feared for their lives from )

I don't think they did. It is pretty clear from the video that they thought he had a gun. It was the heli cop who saw the crawbar or similar and Stephon could easily have ditched it when he saw the police chopper and needed to run.

Police managed to apprehend Nikolas Cruz - someone they knew irrefutably had murdered 17 people - without killing him.

That's probably because he surrendered and did not run from them and then suddenly reversed. In the dark. Holding an object.

I guess current day BSO are just that much better than Sacramento police?

What's BSO? And no, it's behavior. You surrender, nothing will happen to you. Plenty of black suspects get arrested without incident, even murder suspects. In the US, millions of people get arrested each year, while about a thousand get shot. Do the fucking math.

 

[Derec]

From the video, it does seem the police (at least one of them) thought he did have a gun when they shot him. When they turn the corner it's, "Show me your hands!" Immediately followed by, "Gun, gun, gun!" He didn't have a gun. Whether it was suitably reasonable to think he did, I'm not sure. If this is considered a legal shooting, I do have contempt for a system that puts police lives so far above citizen lives, that they are authorized to pull the trigger when there's a way lower certainty of seeing a gun than beyond reasonable doubt. When in doubt, police lives come first.

A beyond a reasonable doubt standard would result in many more dead cops. And Stephon escalated the encounter by running and then suddenly reversing. I can't at this point fault the police for thinking the object he was holding was a gun. Had Stephon surrendered right then and there, he'd still be alive. In jail, but alive.

 

[Derec]

Found some details about his criminal record from this Sacramento Bee article.

Clark had a juvenile court record dating back to 2012, with offenses that include grand theft, robbery and receiving stolen property.
As an adult, he had been charged in four criminal cases since 2014. In 2014, records show, Clark was arrested and charged with felony armed robbery and assault and endangering the life of a child. Details of that case were unavailable Thursday, but court documents indicate that Clark pleaded no contest and spent a year on a sheriff’s department work project to satisfy his jail term.
In late 2015, Clark was charged with “pimping” after sheriff’s deputies stopped him and a woman while they were driving in a “high prostitution and crime area” in North Highlands. At the time, both Clark and the woman were on probation, records indicate. Clark pleaded no contest to the charge.
In 2016, Clark was charged with domestic violence “resulting in a traumatic condition” to the victim. The incident happened at a residence in Elk Grove. When police arrived, they found the woman “holding a bag of ice to her face,” according to a narrative by Elk Grove police.
She had suffered “bruising and swelling to her right eye,” it says, and complained of pain in her right elbow. The woman said Clark had punched her.
Clark’s most recent brush with the law occurred earlier this year, when he again was charged with domestic violence. Details on that case were sketchy on Thursday.

Sounds like a great guy. And he started his criminal career in 2012 when he was just 16 years old. Charming.
It also means that his brother is a liar.
The man shot and killed by Sacramento police was turning his life around, his brother says

Stevante Clark says his 22-year-old brother was a devoted father who had recently changed his life, and he wasn't a thief.
Stephon Clark is remembered as outgoing, a father of two young sons who was trying to turn his life around despite previous trouble with the law, his brother said.
"He was arrested before, but he's been different lately," Stevante Clark told CNN sister network HLN.

What bullshit. Not a thief despite grand theft and robbery in his criminal record. "Lately he's been different" but he he was charged with domestic violence in 2018. Uh-huh. And CNN is eating up the bullshit the family serves them and asking for seconds. They are totally outclassed by the local Sacramento paper when it comes to actual journalism.

 

[Politesse]

All these folks who think running away is a sign of aggression and/or a crime deserving of a street execution must have been playground bullies as children.

 

[James Brown]

How would this situation have played out differently if it occurred in a police state?

 

[Derec]

All these folks who think running away is a sign of aggression and/or a crime deserving of a street execution must have been playground bullies as children.

Nobody is saying that "running away" deserves a "street execution". But running away from police increases the chances of things going south, for example because police, in the dark, mistakes your iPhone for a gun. Sure, most of the time running suspects will be apprehended otherwise, but sometimes you win the suck lottery, and this was Stephon's turn.

And reversing direction and coming at police after previously running away is definitely an aggressive move and increases chances of bad things happening to you even more.

 

[Derec]

How would this situation have played out differently if it occurred in a police state?

I am guessing that in a police state he'd still be prison on account of his rap sheet.
Even in most non-police states you'd expect somebody to get more than one year "work program" for armed robbery and assault for example. Is California usually a revolving door state when it comes to violent felons?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

OP created an impression that the guy was sitting on his grandma backyard and playing on his iPhone and police just shoot him.

Of course. Anything to pretend it wasn't justified.

 

[Toni]

Have they released helicopter footage?

Yes, but the videos I have found all edit the heli footage with body cam footage and commentary. Like this one.

What is clear though is:
- he wasn't hanging out in the yard playing on his iPhone. He entered the yard just seconds before police saw him, and he entered by climbing onto something and jumping over the fence.
- as soon as he saw the police, he took off running around the corner of the house and then turned back and walked toward police. That's a really stupid thing to do, especially in the dark, especially holding an object.

By the way, this is grandma's house.

So, there is no footage demonstrating that Clark was the person breaking windows.

Officers shout from around a corner to show hands. He moves towards the sound of the voices, presumably to show hands. He's shot down. The officers say there were 5-7 shots fired.

There were 20 shots fired.

I cannot understand why the officers had their weapons drawn at all.

Clark climbed over the wall to his grandmother's back yard. He is seen walking leisurely up to the wall--hardly someone who is being pursued by police.

FWIW, I lived in a neighborhod that had a fair number of student rentals. In fact, the previous owners of the house behind mine turned it into a college rental. One night (of many similar nights), there was a loud party at the college rental. One or more of the neighbors called it in, and described a pretty loud party scene with pot smoke and plenty of people drinking. Lots of glass breaking. Someone started a fire in a dumpster in the back yard. The police showed up and all of the sudden about 40 or 50 people around Clark's age are climbing over the wall in the back of my yard that separated my yard from that of the college rental. Students clambered over, streamed through fences and gates, breaking pickets on my fence and my neighbors on their way out.

The police did not have their firearms out, did not pursue these party goers, did not shoot anyone. They did arrest a couple of people who were being pretty belligerent because they were very drunk and at least one gave his age demonstrating that he was below the legal age for drinking. Story described here to illustrate that even when greatly outnumbered with obvious vandalism, an illegal dumpster fire, pot smoking and minor consumption of alcohol in progress, police officers did not feel the need to draw their weapons or shoot anyone.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If people have a proper rebuttal they usually provide it. People generally resort to attacks when they can't address the issue.

Believe it or not, I actually have a life that includes a need for sleep so that I can get up too damn early and drive too damn far to go to work then drive home too damn far and figure out dinner, pay attention to those I live with and do some chores from time to time.

Sorry if you don't get enough attention from me.

If you had not responded I wouldn't have read anything into it. I'm saying that an attack in lieu of a rebuttal usually means no rebuttal.

To get back to the post you are upset I did not expand upon: It's been pointed out more than once in this thread that after they killed that poor young man in his grandmother's back yard, they only 'weapon' they found on or near him was a white cell phone. Probably pretty darn close to the one I own.

Which doesn't say he didn't have it a moment earlier. It looks like he was trying to play the "who, me?" bit--and the police assumed he still had what he had before.

The police officers entered a back yard with no outdoor lights in the dark, came upon a young man and within SECONDS fired their guns at him, killing him dead, cuffing him and continued shouting orders at this poor dead person they just murdered. In his grandmother's back yard, coming in the way she always had family come in, into the home where he was living.

You're ignoring the fact they were chasing him.

In those few seconds between when they came into the yard and began firing, the police did not identify themselves nor even pause for breath between shouting orders at this man in his grandmother's back yard! to drop the weapon he did not have before they shot him dead, emptying their own weapons. He had no weapon. He did NOTHING threatening except exist in his own grandmother's back yard, the back yard of the home where he was living and have a cell phone in his hand.

When you're being chased by a helicopter you're either somebody very important or it's the government after you. It's the cops.

The police officers were wrong, and should be suspended pending investigation which should result in a trial for murder and manslaughter and they should be removed from their jobs and have their rights to own or carry firearms permanently suspended.

Yeah, they shot a black. That's all we need to know, obviously guilty.

 

[Toni]

If you had not responded I wouldn't have read anything into it. I'm saying that an attack in lieu of a rebuttal usually means no rebuttal.

What attack?

To get back to the post you are upset I did not expand upon: It's been pointed out more than once in this thread that after they killed that poor young man in his grandmother's back yard, they only 'weapon' they found on or near him was a white cell phone. Probably pretty darn close to the one I own.

Which doesn't say he didn't have it a moment earlier. It looks like he was trying to play the "who, me?" bit--and the police assumed he still had what he had before.

Really? Why are you so quick to assume he had a weapon? There's zero evidence of him ever having had a weapon.

The police officers entered a back yard with no outdoor lights in the dark, came upon a young man and within SECONDS fired their guns at him, killing him dead, cuffing him and continued shouting orders at this poor dead person they just murdered. In his grandmother's back yard, coming in the way she always had family come in, into the home where he was living.

You're ignoring the fact they were chasing him.

Really? I see zero footage of police chasing anyone. I hear zero news coverage of anyone chasing anyone. Police are heard early in the tape asking if they can enter a backyard to look for someone. It isn't clear at all that they are looking for Clark. They aren't chasing anyone until they run at him in his grandmother's back yard, shouting in the dark and he turns and runs away--a natural reaction considering they didn't identify themselves as police officers, it was night and he would not have been able to tell who was shouting at him.

In those few seconds between when they came into the yard and began firing, the police did not identify themselves nor even pause for breath between shouting orders at this man in his grandmother's back yard! to drop the weapon he did not have before they shot him dead, emptying their own weapons. He had no weapon. He did NOTHING threatening except exist in his own grandmother's back yard, the back yard of the home where he was living and have a cell phone in his hand.

When you're being chased by a helicopter you're either somebody very important or it's the government after you. It's the cops.

You're making an assumption that Clark was the person they were looking for and that the police were chasing him. Again, there is zero evidence that he is being chased by anyone. As far as you or I know, he was in a hurry to get home because something was going on, what with the helicopters out and all. I would have been in a hurry to get home, too, no matter what I was doing.

The police officers were wrong, and should be suspended pending investigation which should result in a trial for murder and manslaughter and they should be removed from their jobs and have their rights to own or carry firearms permanently suspended.

Yeah, they shot a black. That's all we need to know, obviously guilty.

They shot an unarmed person in his own back yard in about 7 seconds after entering the yard and never having identified themselves as police officers. It doesn't matter what color anybody is: that's poor police procedure, dangerous to the community at large and surely a violation of department protocol when investigating cases of vandalism.

Maybe it isn't the way you really feel but your posting history seems to suggest that if a police officer shoots an unarmed black person, the black person is guilty of something and deserved to be shot. I cannot recall a single instance when you thought the police were wrong to shoot an unarmed black person, including a child.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, they shot an unarmed black who was currently in the yard of which he lived.

I understand that nuance isn't too important here.

The only lives that were in danger were the ones of the officers that again, pumped with adrenaline of a chase, place themselves needlessly in harms way.

The person shot, was guilty at worst of vandalism and destruction to property. Is this the type of criminal that gets this level of take down?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

All these folks who think running away is a sign of aggression and/or a crime deserving of a street execution must have been playground bullies as children.

How about paying a little attention to the facts?

His running is simply evidence he wasn't simply minding his own business in the back yard.

And he got shot for advancing on the police when they thought he was armed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

OP created an impression that the guy was sitting on his grandma backyard and playing on his iPhone and police just shoot him.

Of course. Anything to pretend it wasn't justified.

His death wasn't justified in the least. On what planet are the circumstances presented that indicate his death was justified. At best, the officers will not face any punishment because they didn't intend to murder someone.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How would this situation have played out differently if it occurred in a police state?

He wouldn't have tried the "who, me?" bit.

 

[James Brown]

Am I allowed to shoot someone coming toward me if I think they might be armed?

If I shoot someone coming toward me, and it turns out he's not armed, should I be condemned in any way? Or is that sort of homicide always justifiable?

 

[Toni]

How would this situation have played out differently if it occurred in a police state?

He wouldn't have tried the "who, me?" bit.

Seriously, Loren? I mean WTF?

I'm sure Trump would be happy to facilitate your immigration to Russia or North Korea. I'll even throw you an online party if you decide to go. But this is America and good Americans take things like civil liberties, civil rights and the right to be in your own back yard without being gunned down by police who don't even bother to identify themselves as police very seriously.

 

[Toni]

All these folks who think running away is a sign of aggression and/or a crime deserving of a street execution must have been playground bullies as children.

How about paying a little attention to the facts?

His running is simply evidence he wasn't simply minding his own business in the back yard.

And he got shot for advancing on the police when they thought he was armed.

Really? If you are in your own backyard at night and some intruder you cannot see comes into the yard and begins shouting at you, your first impulse would not be to get inside as quickly as possible? If I had my phone on me, I'd have it out and be calling 911 and so would you, I'll bet.

It was 7 seconds, Loren, from the time the police entered the yard until Clark was dead and even then they wouldn't stop barking orders at him and never identified themselves as officers.

As you pointed out, there was a helicopter overhead, so why wouldn't an innocent person think that the person shouting at them in the dark, threatening them was the same person the police were looking for?

He got shot for turning toward the police to show them he had no weapon. That is just as likely as what you are claiming, especially since HE HAD NO WEAPON.