Crime

OP-ED: How Many More Will We Mourn?

Published

9 years ago

June 8, 2015

By Cornell William Brooks, President/CEO, NAACP

How many more lives of unarmed Black men and women, tragically and senselessly killed by police, will our nation have to mourn before our country moves to fix its unjust and ineffective criminal justice system?

Freddie Gray wasn’t the only person to die at the hands of the police in April.

Before Gray suffered three broken vertebrae during the course of his arrest by Baltimore police, 17-year-old Justus Howell was fatally shot by an unidentified officer in Zion, Ill. Like the death of Gray, Howell’s death was ruled a homicide.

On the day that Gray was laid to rest and protests and demonstrations against police brutality rung out in Baltimore, a group of local and federal law enforcement officers arrived at the home of 20-year-old Terrance Kellom, who was a suspect in a robbery case.

Less than 10 minutes after police entered Terrance Kellom’s home, he was dead, shot several times by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer who was part of an inter-agency fugitive task force for reasons that remain unclear.

Then there was 37-year-old Natasha Mckenna. This 130-pound woman died after she was taser shocked four times by the Fairfax, Va. police Feb. 3, with her hands cuffed behind her back, shackled around her legs, with a hobble strap connecting both of the restraints. Police say they are still investigating.

More than 400 people have died while in police custody this year and the list keeps growing, according to an online database that compiles news reports of instances of use of deadly force.

The NAACP says no more.

One of our most recent achievements: the NAACP alongside its valiant coalition partners helped to dismantle the practice of stop and frisk in New York and leveraged a successful collaborative campaign to pass anti-racial profiling and police accountability measures.

Now the NAACP is advocating for body worn cameras, car cameras and gun and taser cameras. Additionally, we must deploy the use of independent investigation bodies and the use of civilian review boards. But we cannot do it alone. Join us in our fight.

Help us pass the End Racial Profiling Act – which comprehensively addresses the insidious practice of biased treatment by law enforcement because of who you are, or who you are perceived to be, by law enforcement. Call your U.S. senators and representative in Washington and tell them to pass the End Racial Profiling Act. The switchboard phone number is (202) 224-3121.

Support America’s Journey for Justice: This year, we are continuing our work with America’s Journey for Justice – a trek along the 850-mile route from Selma, Ala., to Washington, DC – through Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia – to highlight the need for criminal justice and voting reforms because our lives matter and our children deserve to live.

Every American deserves the opportunity to grow and thrive and reach their full potential. And every American child has the potential to become our nation’s leading scientists, entrepreneurs, scholars, lawmakers and law enforcement officials.

It is us who must protect them.

Cornell William Brooks, President and CEO of NAACP.

Cornell William Brooks is president/CEO of the Baltimore-based NAACP.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Families of Drone Strike Victims in Yemen File Suit in Washington

Don't Miss

Medi-Cal Renewal Now Automatic for Eligible Californians

Oakland Post

Click to comment

California Black Media

Commentary: Finding the Right Balance — Addressing Organized Retail Theft While Upholding Civil Liberties

Organized retail theft is a significant issue that impacts both consumers and businesses. While it is crucial to address theft and protect businesses from losses, we should also be mindful of safeguarding individuals’ constitutional rights, particularly the right to due process. AB 1990 by Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, also known as the STOP Act, raises concerns about the balance between addressing theft effectively and ensuring civil liberties are upheld.

Published

21 hours ago

April 17, 2024

Oakland Post

Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood)

By Assemblymember Tina McKinnor | Special to California Black Media Partners

AB 1990 by Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, also known as the STOP Act, raises concerns about the balance between addressing theft effectively and ensuring civil liberties are upheld. This bill allows law enforcement officers to make warrantless arrests for shoplifting offenses not witnessed by the officer, as long as there is reasonable cause to believe the individual committed the crime. This bill has a dangerous potential for overreach and infringes on civil liberties, particularly the right to due process.

While the stated intention behind the STOP Act is to combat organized retail theft and protect businesses, there are valid concerns that this bill is an overreach and that existing law works, if properly enforced by our partners in law enforcement. A petty theft involving property stolen valued at $950 or less may be charged as a felony or misdemeanor (called a wobbler) if the offender has the following prior convictions:  1) at least on prior petty or theft-related conviction for which a term of imprisonment was served, and 2) a prior conviction for a serious or violent offense, for any registerable sex offense, or for embezzlement from a dependent adult or anyone over the age of 65.  A misdemeanor can result in a sentence of up to one year in jail, whereas a felon can mean incarceration for 16 months, two years or three years.  Let’s look at shoplifting in California.  It occurs when a suspect enters a store, while that establishment is open, intending to steal property worth less than $950.  The crime is considered a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in the county jail.

Granting officers the authority to arrest individuals based on reasonable cause, without witnessing the crime firsthand, can lead to negative consequences and possible violations of individual rights. Probable cause is the legal standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal and for the courts to issue a search warrant. A grand jury uses the probable cause standard to determine whether or not to issue a criminal indictment.  The principle behind the probable cause standard is to limit the power of authorities to conduct unlawful search and seizure of a person or its property, and to promote formal, forensic procedures for gathering lawful evidence for the prosecution of the arrested criminal.  Reasonable cause does not require any of this due process and only requires that an officer reasonably believes that a crime has been committed. It is essential to find a middle ground that effectively addresses organized retail theft without compromising the fundamental rights of individuals.

California’s current laws, including the use of witness statements and surveillance evidence are sufficient for addressing suspected shoplifting and organized retail theft. California Attorney General Rob Bonta recently prosecuted Michelle Mack, a suspected organized smash and grab ringleader who paid twelve women to travel around California and commit over $8 million in retail theft at 21 different stores. AG Bonta used California’s current laws to have the suspect arrested and brought to justice.

The State of California is also making significant investments to address retail theft. Just this past year California invested an additional $267 million to combat organized retail theft. It has been less than a year and our law enforcement partners should have the opportunity to address this recent spike in retail theft crime.

Los Angeles County recently applied for and received a grant for the State of California for $15.6 million dollars to address retail theft enforcement.  LA District Attorney George Gascon also recently formed an organized retail task force that partners with LA County Sheriff’s Department, Glendale, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Torrance and Santa Monica Police Departments to integrate their response to retail theft across the region. These collaborative efforts, such as those seen in initiatives like the organized retail task force in LA County, demonstrate the importance of a united approach to tackling theft while maintaining a balance between enforcement and civil liberties.

As we move forward, it is essential for policymakers, law enforcement agencies, businesses and communities to work together in finding solutions that effectively address organized retail theft without encroaching on individual rights. Ongoing evaluation and a commitment to thoughtful consideration will be crucial in navigating this challenge and fostering a safe and prosperous environment for all. Balancing the scales of justice to protect businesses while upholding civil liberties demands a comprehensive and conscientious approach from all stakeholders involved.

I am confident we can find that balance.

About the Author

Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood) represents the 61^st District in Los Angeles County, which includes parts of the South Bay, Inglewood, Hawthorne and Lawndale.