By Robert H. Hansen
In the wake of the shooting in Downtown Sacramento that claimed the lives of six and injured twelve others early Sunday morning, Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert’s practices as DA have come into question.
So far, none of the three arrests made in connection to Sunday’s shooting are directly related to firing a gun.
Gil Duran of the San Francisco Examiner wrote, “She (Schubert) regularly attacks Democratic leaders, tying them to heinous crimes. Regular targets include Bonta, San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, and Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón.”
In his opinion article, the former Sacramento Bee editor said Schubert should end her campaign for Attorney General.
“Schubert has fallen down on the job,” Duran said. “If she thinks Boudin should be recalled despite S.F.’s relatively low rates of murder and violent crime, what’s the rationale for promoting her to state attorney general despite spiraling violence in Sacramento?”
The Vanguard reported showing data from their respective police departments for the 2020 – 2021 calendar year showing that San Francisco had a 17 percent increase in homicide and Los Angeles had a 12 percent increase in homicide, while Sacramento has had a 31 percent increase in homicide.
Alana Mathews, a candidate for Sacramento County DA, visited some of the family members impacted by Sunday’s shooting.
“I have not had an opportunity to visit with all of the families affected, but those I connected with were experiencing a range of emotions from devastation, and frustration to grief, shock, and sadness,” Mathews said.
Mathews said tragic events like this can take days and sometimes weeks to process, so it’s important to understand trauma-informed communication and to meet individuals where they are.
“It is also important to acknowledge their hurt and that they are victims. I showed up as a concerned community member, not as a candidate, acknowledging their hurt and asking how to be supportive,” Mathews said.
She said the families appreciated that and this simple act is how you build trust, break down barriers, and bridge divisions.
Mathews says we have to disrupt the false dichotomies associated with being tough and supporting reform.
“I believe in being tough on violent and serious crime and I also support common-sense reforms that embrace prevention and intervention strategies,” Mathews said. “The two are not mutually exclusive.”
Schubert has been ineffective in reducing gun violence because she hasn’t prioritized it, according to Mathews, and, instead, it has been normalized in certain neighborhoods and the community prosecution unit has mainly focused on quality of life crimes like public nuisances and not gun violence.
“That’s why ending gun violence has been my top priority and I’ve provided a plan on how I will address this growing epidemic on day one,” Mathews said. “Let me be clear that I will prosecute those who engage in gun violence, especially when they take innocent lives, to the fullest extent of the law.
Candidate for Santa Clara County District Attorney Sajid Khan says continued punitive, carceral responses to harm are not making communities safer.
“The way we prevent violence in our communities is by investing in mental health services, substance abuse services, and trauma-informed care,” Khan said.
The data shows that counties with “tough on crime” DAs that continue to use incarceration and a solely punitive approach are not solving violence, according to Khan.
“If we’re truly invested in solving harm in our communities, including violent crime, as opposed to merely punishing it, then we have to recognize that being tough on crime is not accomplishing that goal,” Khan said.
Mathews survived a random drive-by shooting as a teenager while hanging out with her youth group at her pastor’s house and no one was ever held accountable.
“Reducing gun violence means more than prosecuting these crimes in the courtroom,” Mathews said.
Mathews laid out her plan if she becomes Sacramento County’s next district attorney.
- Prioritize removing guns from those who should not have them–including domestic violence abusers.
- Tackle the problem of ghost gun violence, distribution, and illegal manufacturing in partnership with law enforcement officers, the California Attorney General, and state legislators.
- Support violence intervention programs that apply a community-centered approach to addressing gun violence in neighborhoods with particularly high rates of gun violence.
- Educate and empower community members to utilize California’s red flag law which helps deescalate gun violence during dangerous situations & improves safety when clear warning signs exist.
- Form a gun violence task force with clergy, community members, violence prevention groups, downtown businesses, law enforcement, and health care professionals to develop a strategic safety plan for keeping our region safe.
“Assembling this type of think tank to help ensure Sacramento will never [again] be a recipient of such unprecedented violence,” Mathews said.
So, the DA is to blame for the incident at 10th & K because of her policies. Uh huh.
Is that like a trope or something?
It’s an ineffective political argument (and advocacy for/against a candidate), at the least.
If Mr. Hansen is part of the Vanguard’s staff, I’d call that a problem.
The problem is a lack of reading comprehension because nowhere does the article blame Schubert for Sunday’s shooting. She is not. It points out that her priorities have not kept the city safer overall by the collective rise in violent crime.
Moreover, the point is that if she is not responsible for increases in Sacramento’s violent crime, then counties with a lower increase in violent crime (LA & SF) with DAs that have a different approach are also not responsible for their respective rises in violent crime.
No DA is solely responsible. Yet other DAs are attacked for their perceived “soft on crime” approach but not DAs, like Schubert, whose “tough on crime” approach has done no better if not shown to be less effective in reducing violent crime.
There is a way to be both tough on prosecuting violent criminals while also having a community centered priority to preventing crime as Ms. Mathews makes clear.
Oh and Schubert’s request to not release one of the suspects is not a watershed discovery and has been well reported.
I can read just fine, thanks. Normally, I just ignore these type articles, but those who are concerned about the Vanguard’s advocacy toward one candidate (and against the other) do not. There’s already been complaints launched regarding that.
You can try to hide this under the guise of “reporting” for the Vanguard, but from what I’ve seen, the Vanguard has ended up in the “hot seat” in reference to the title of your article.
He’s talking about me.
I have therefore enrolled in a reading course:
Ever since I took this Evelyn Woodhead Sped Riddin’ course, my riddin’ has im-provved one hunert percent and also “comprenshun” has increased “won-der-full-lee”. I recommend the Evelyn Woodhead Sped Riddin’ course to all mah friends out there, and you tell ’em that you heard it here first on Roller Derby
Very good Alan.
Interesting and opportunistic characterization that she’s coming under fire, given that she strongly objected against the early release from prison of at least one of the suspects:
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-05/sacramento-shooting-suspect-got-out-of-prison-early-despite-da-opposition
That is what we call in the industry: a gem
Good find Shane. It sounds like the progressive policies that led to the early release of one of the suspects is what should be under fire, not Schubert.
Yes, this was the Bee’s big news from yesterday. I especially liked this part: “ He faces charges of possession of a machine gun and possession of a firearm by a prohibited person.”
???????
What’s your point?
I think it’s rather obvious – they leaked the story to the Bee, made for great headlines that this guy got early release, but he’s only being charged with possession of a weapon. Not exactly headline news type of stuff or at least shouldn’t be.
The implication in the mainstream media (not just the Sacramento Bee) is that further charges are imminent.
Don’t know who tells them that, but somebody apparently does.
I understand that three people have been arrested (for something), at this point.
Let’s see what the final charges are.
I didn’t get your point either. Those not progressive are so dense. Totally. I’m sure. Bîtchin’. Gag me with a spoon. Oh, mu gawd!
A weapon? My pénís is a weapon. This was a machine gun. Like numerous witnesses have stated that the second weapon heard was a powerful fully automatic. Coincidence?
You seem joyous that he hasn’t been charged with multiple murders . . . yet. Or that he got out of jail early and is roaming a crowded public street with an automatic weapon.
Ron, rest assured, if he was involved in the shootings and does get charged the Vanguard will run a full length article. We can also count on the Vanguard reporting that Schubert fought against his early release.
Keith: The part that bothers me is the “under-reporting” of this issue in the first place, by those who claim to be “oh-so-concerned” about people who are primarily (or maybe even all) “people of color”.
Both the victims and the perpetrators.
And the reason for that is because it doesn’t neatly fit into their narrative.
Not to mention the part about recidivism.
This is the type of issue where “mainstream media” actually does a much better job of reporting the incident. And it’s also something that (for lack of a better word) “David’s type of progressives” are afraid of, or at least would like to add a narrative to it.
In contrast, if one guy (vs. the six who were killed, not to mention those injured) was breaking into a house (and got shot by police because he wasn’t following orders and they mistakenly thought he was pointing a gun at them, for example), we’d be hearing about it for the next year or two.
Including press conferences by attorneys for the family of the “victim”, “protests”, relentless advocacy for criminal charges against the police (especially from “progressive” DAs), a big fat settlement at the expense of taxpayers, etc.
But no, I’m not cynical.
I don’t think you are cynical. I believe you are suffering from DVDS, “Davis Vanguard Derangement Syndrome”.
I think it’s actually “DVOS”
(Davis Vanguard Observational Syndrome.)
Cured by a vote for Reisig and Schubert, or against Boudin or Gascon? Or does that just facilitate it?
As if the criticism of a few angry conservatives is supposed to mean something to me. Often I have conversations with conservatives and regularly find areas of common ground. And if you few where ever anything other than argumentative your opinions would possibly mean something to me. Unfortunately that is not the case.
Be that as it may, thanks for reading. ?
Who, specifically, are you referring to as ‘angry conservatives’ ?
https://davisvanguard.org/2022/04/coalition-wants-governor-to-invest-billions-in-crime-prevention-in-wake-of-shooting/
https://original.newsbreak.com/@robert-j-hansen-1587368/2563762622645-sacramento-police-make-third-arrest-in-connection-to-sunday-s-shooting?s=influencer
https://davisvanguard.org/2022/04/sacramento-police-chief-addresses-the-mass-shooting/
Underreporting? Narrative? ??