Featured

Assassinated Twice: Sacramento DA Schubert Murders Stephon Clark’s Character

Published

7 years ago

March 14, 2019

Mark T. Harris Esq., Special to California Black Media Partners

Last week, we, the freedom-believing and fair-minded residents of Sacramento, California, were disappointed to our cores. Our worst fears became reality.

The Sacramento African-American community had been holding its collective breath, our fingers crossed, hanging on to the unlikely hope that either Ann Marie Schubert, our county district attorney, or Xavier Becera, our state’s attorney general, would do the right thing and bring charges against the officers who shot and killed Stephon Clark.

Unfortunately, Sacramento has developed a shameful legacy relative to the killing of unarmed African-American men. Once again, our justice system has reinforced that reputation.

First, in April of 2016, Sacramento police offices shot and killed Daizon Flenaugh, a mentally ill Black man who cops said was exhibiting “strange behavior” and ranting incoherently before they took away his life. Flenaugh was found to be unarmed at the time of his death.

Then in July of that same year, Joseph Mann was shot several times by Sacramento police after he “appeared agitated” and threw a plastic water bottle at them before attempting to flee. Unlike the circumstances surrounding Flenaugh’s killing, there were several video and audio transmissions that bolstered arguments that police were acting with actual malice toward Mann.

Finally, in March of last year, Mr. Stephon Clark, who was clearly unarmed at the time of his death, became the latest and most widely-known victim of the Sacramento Police Department.

None of the officers involved in the three shootings described above were required to face criminal charges.

Most distressing to us is this: District Attorney Schubert in her lengthy recent press conference—and Attorney General Becera in his shortly after—unconscionably and deliberately implied that Stephon Clark sought his own “death by police officers.”

Our top legal officials, who we entrust with the judgment and wisdom to stand up for our rights and protection, justified their decision with the irrelevant evidence that Clark “researched ways to commit suicide” days before police officers tragically killed him.

This heartless attempt to assassinate Mr. Clark twice; once physically and once relative to his character, must not be tolerated!

Reasonable people might differ over many of the sad facts pertaining to the death of Stephon Clark. However, what is beyond dispute are the following.

First, at worst, Clark was accused of vandalizing automobiles. Second, he was unarmed.
Third, he was trying to enter his grandmother’s home at the time of his death and not fleeing a contrived police chase leveled up to the pursuit of someone suspected of domestic terrorism.

Fourth, he was shot several times in the back or side of his body which would lend strong support to the theory that he was not approaching officers at the time of his death as claimed—unless, of course, he was doing so running backwards.

The best forum for the consideration of the four factors above, relative to any law enforcement culpability in the death of Clark, would have been in the legal sanctum of a courtroom. There, under the watchful eyes and ruling of a judge, the entire range of evidence pertinent to his death could be presented before a jury in a criminal trial.
A civil suit on behalf of Clark’s children and family will proceed.

However, that is not close to the best vehicle for answering one of the key questions left unanswered by Schubert and Becera’s exoneration of the Sacramento police officers responsible for shooting Clark. The move by Schubert and Becerra literally slams the door on justice for the Clark family. Their decisions are now solely dispositive as they relate to an impartial, evidence-based inquiry into the Clark’s death. Neither Schubert nor Becera should be executing the responsibilities of a judge or jury. Their conclusions here, though, serve to cast them in those roles.

Let’s pretend for a minute that either Schubert or Becera had instead made the proper decision to bring charges against the officers. Those officers would have had the right to legal counsel and to have their actions considered by a jury in a legal process following the Constitution and the rules of criminal procedure and evidence.

In other words, they, and Clark’s family, would have had their full “day in court” where all of the facts pertaining to Clark’s death could be considered.

Isn’t that the criminal justice process each of us is told over and over we must have confidence in? We are reminded time and again, that justice is both fair and impartial, theoretically favoring no one.

I guess Schubert and Becera don’t want to take any chances with the fate of the officers who took Clark’s life. After all, an independent “jury of their peers” may have found them to be criminally culpable.

I would hope that we can take Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg at his word when he made the statement that the city of Sacramento is in need of substantial police reform.

Further, I would hope that he and the entire city are not just now waking up to that realization. After all, those who live in certain neighborhoods within our city, or are economically disadvantaged or Black, have been telling city leaders the same for a very long time.

Mark T. Harris Esq. is a Sacramento-based attorney continuing lecturer and director, pre-law studies UC Merced and the co-founder Law Enforcement Accountability Directive (“L.E.A.D.”) a community based organization in Sacramento.

Mark T. Harris Esq., Special to California Black Media Partners

Posts by Mark T. Harris Esq., Special to California Black Media Partners

Up Next

Churches Launch Car Park for Homeless

Don't Miss

The Theology And Politics of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Mark T. Harris Esq., Special to California Black Media Partners

Click to comment

#NNPA BlackPress

Poll Shows Support for Policies That Help Families Afford Child Care

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — New national polling shows persistent voter concern about the affordability and availability of child care for working parents, alongside broad support across key demographic groups for federal child care policies that help families afford care.

Published

4 days ago

March 2, 2026

Oakland Post

By First Five Years Fund

New national polling shows persistent voter concern about the affordability and availability of child care for working parents, alongside broad support across key demographic groups for federal child care policies that help families afford care.

The national survey was conducted by UpOne Insight on behalf of the First Five Years Fund from January 13–18, 2026.

Key findings include:

• Parents need help: 80% of voters say the ability of working parents to find and afford child care is either in a state of crisis or a major problem.

• This is an affordability issue: 82% believe federal child care funding will help lower costs for working families — including 69% of Republicans, 84% of Independents, and 94% of Democrats.

• And there continues to be strong support (62%) for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), a federal program that makes it possible for hundreds of thousands of families to afford safe, quality care for their children while parents work or go to school, including a majority of Republicans, 63% of Independents and 72% of Democrats.

• Support for funding child care programs remains strong: 75% believe child care funding should be increased or kept at current levels — including 75% of Republicans, 85% of Independents, and 97% of Democrats.

• 74% say funding for child care is an important and good use of tax dollars, including a majority of Republicans, three-quarters of Independents, and nine in ten Democrats.

FFYF Executive Director Sarah Rittling said, “Voters across the country are sending a clear message: federal child care and early learning programs work. These investments help parents stay in the workforce, strengthen families, and support healthy child development. They have also long had strong bipartisan support in Congress. At a time when affordability is top of mind for families, continued federal funding is essential to ensure child care remains accessible and within reach.”

First Five Years Fund works to protect, prioritize, and build bipartisan support for quality child care and early learning programs at the federal level. Reliable, affordable, and high-quality early learning and child care can be transformative, not only enhancing a child’s prospects for a brighter future but also bolstering working parents and fostering economic stability nationwide.

We work with Congress and the Administration to identify federal solutions that work for families with young children, as well as states and communities. We work with policymakers to identify ways to increase access to affordable, high-quality child care and early learning programs for children. And we collaborate with advocacy groups to help align best practices with the best possible policies. http://www.ffyf.org

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of February 25 – March 3, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – February 25 – March 3, 2026

Published

5 days ago

March 1, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

#NNPA BlackPress

Trump’s MAGA Allies are Creating Executive Order Plan to Steal the 2026 Midterms

NNPA NEWSWIRE — The document that could lead to an executive order proposes using the claim that China interfered with the 2020 elections as grounds to “declare a national emergency.” The move would be an unprecedented step that would grant Trump new authority over the voting systems in the U.S.

Published

7 days ago

February 27, 2026

Oakland Post

By Lauren Victoria Burke, NNPA Newswire Correspondent

A group of MAGA pro-Trump activists, who say they are working in coordination with the White House, are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that would claim without evidence that China interfered with the 2020 presidential election. Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential to President Joe Biden by over 7 million votes. Since Trump lost to Biden in 2020, he has repeatedly claimed that the election was “stolen” without evidence. The report of a group of “Trump allies” preparing an executive order to give Trump power over elections was first reported by The Washington Post.

The lies around the right-wing campaign that pushed falsehoods that the 2020 election was stolen was trafficked through right-wing media, particularly Fox News. Fox News was then sued for defamation for the claims by Dominion Voting Systems. Fox lost the case and had to settle for the largest defamation amount on record of $787.5 million in April 2023.

The document that could lead to an executive order proposes using the claim that China interfered with the 2020 elections as grounds to “declare a national emergency.” The move would be an unprecedented step that would grant Trump new authority over the voting systems in the U.S.

The story in The Washington Post arrives as Trump increasingly signals that he may take actions that would alter the result of the 2026 midterms. The Republicans are widely expected to lose as their approval ratings plummet as a result of a failing economy under Trump. Over 50 members of Congress have announced they will retire this year and not return in 2027.

The Trump Department of Justice, which now has a large image of Trump on the side of it, “sued five new states Thursday [Feb. 26, 2026] demanding access to their unredacted voter rolls — escalating a campaign that has been rejected by multiple federal courts and faces resistance from Republican-led states as well,” according to Democracy Docket, a group that works to protect voting rights.

Trump claimed back in late 2020, the last year of his first term, that he had the authority to issue an executive order related to mail-in voting for the 2020 elections — which he would then lose. But the Constitution states that control of elections lies with the states. As the GOP works to place hurdles in front of voting, Democrats worked to make voting easier.

In March 2021, President Biden signed an executive order calling on federal agencies to expand voting access as part of the Biden Administration’s effort “to promote and defend the right to vote for all Americans who are legally entitled to participate in elections.”

Trump’s focus is clearly on altering the November 2026 midterm elections. Trump’s polling numbers and the elections and special elections that have taken place around the U.S. over the last year clearly indicate that Republicans are about to be hit by a blue wave of Democratic victories.

Lauren Victoria Burke is an independent investigative journalist and the founder of Black Virginia News. She is a political analyst who appears on #RolandMartinUnfiltered and hosts the show LAUREN LIVE on YouTube @LaurenVictoriaBurke. She can be contacted at LBurke007@gmail.com and on twitter at @LVBurke