Monday, May 27, 2019

A Bill to Save Lives

Courtesy of

Are you aware that there is a bill going through the California State Assembly that needs your support? The bill - AB 392: The California Act to Save Lives – redefines the circumstances under which police officers in the state can use deadly force. Currently, police officers can kill a person even when they have available options other than the use of lethal force.

AB 392 limits the power of police officers to use deadly force and gives them the authority to use deadly force only when they don’t have other options. AB 392 was introduced in February 2019 by California Assembly members Shirley Weber and Kevin McCarthy in response to the murder of Stephon Clark in Sacramento and the recent murders of other young black men at the hands of the police.

The bill is expected to be voted on in the California State Assembly by the end of this month.
AB 392 amends California Penal Code (CPC) section 196 (Justifiable Homicide by a Peace Officer) and CPC 835a (Authority to Use Force) and enacts a new standard for police officers to follow before they use their guns. Read the complete bill here.

Unlike AB 931, an earlier bill, which was also authored by Assembly members Weber and McCarthy for the purpose of restricting police officers’ use of deadly force, that was defeated by the law enforcement community, AB 392 recently gained the backing of key law enforcement groups.

You can see several of the supporters of AB 392 discuss the impact that police shootings have had on their lives and on their family members in this Talking with Henrietta television show called, Getting a Male Perspective. The show was taped on May 23, 2019 and can be seen in its entirety here.

While AB 392 establishes separate standards for non-lethal force, lethal force and non-lethal use of force resulting in an in-custody death, it also allows for an officer to be charged with manslaughter if a mistake is made, for example, in “situations in which the victim is a person other than the person that the peace officer was seeking to arrest, retain in custody, or defend against, or if the necessity for the use of deadly force was created by the peace officer’s criminal negligence.”

AB 392 is supported by such organizations as the ACLU CA, Alliance for Boys an Men of Color, Anti Police-Terror Project, Black Lives Matter, CA, CA Faculty Association, Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice (CURYJ) , PICO (Faith in Action), CA, Silicon Valley DeBug, United Domestic Workers of America (UDW), AFSCME Local 3930, PolicyLink, Youth Justice LA, CA Families United 4 Justice, STOP Coalition

Public protests and concerns over police shootings are making a difference. A second bill, SB 230, which was originally backed by the law enforcement community, “would require each law enforcement agency to maintain a policy that provides guidelines on the use of force, utilizing deescalation techniques and other alternatives to force when feasible, specific guidelines for the application of deadly force, and factors for evaluating and reviewing all use of force incidents, among other things. The bill would require each agency to make their use of force policy accessible to the public. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.”

AB 392 was last amended by the Assembly Rules Committee on May 24, 2019 and is expected to be voted on by the full assembly soon. SB 230 was ordered to have a third reading by the CA State Senate on May 16, 2019. Expect a final vote later this month or in early June.

Contact your local state legislators and let them know what you think. Leave your comments below, also. We’d like to know what you think, too.  It is a life and death matter!


Tuesday, April 2, 2019

Recognizing Dorothy Gilliam – a Media Pioneer

Dorothy Gilliam sits with Martin Reynolds at the
Kapor Center in Oakland, CA on March 30, 2019.

It is not everyday that one has the chance to hear from people who broke through barriers to become the first in their field. But, such was the case last Saturday, March 30, when the Maynard Institute for Journalism Education held a media event that featured Dorothy Gilliam, the first African-American, female reporter at the Washington Post. The event was called 'A Conversation with Dorothy Gilliam,” and as you might expect, some of the experiences that Gilliam shared were not only informative, but also quite moving. Gilliam discussed some of the challenging experiences she had working at the paper and reporting on some of the civil rights protests that happened in the American south during the height of the civil rights struggles of the 1960’s.

Her appearance Saturday at the Kapor Center in Oakland came at the end of her three-month book tour to promote her new memoir called, “TRAILBLAZER: A Pioneering Journalist’s Fight to Make the Media Look More Like America.” Those of us who attended the event had a chance to ask her questions after the riveting discussion she had with the Maynard Institute’s co-executive director, Martin Reynolds, who moderated the event.
Having a photo taken with Dorothy Gilliam and two of the East Palo Alto Center for Community Media’s board members after her talk, made the event all the more memorable. 

From left, EPACCM board members Elizabeth Jackson, Marie Davis and Henrietta J. Burroughs
stand with Dorothy Gilliam after her presentation at the Kapor Center on March 30, 2019.

You can get more information about Gilliam and her book from her Facebook page at I, definitely, look forward to speaking with Gilliam in the upcoming months on my show, Talking with Henrietta. I’ll keep you posted, when a taping date is near.

Saturday, March 9, 2019

Lady Justice Is Not Blind

Lady Justice
Courtesy of

Many in our nation have known for some time that our country has two criminal justice systems: one for the rich and the other for the poor.

This fact was not only highlighted, but also underscored when Paul Manafort was sentenced to 47 months in prison this week – well below the federal guidelines that ranged from 19 to 24 years.

If there were ever a case of sentencing disparity, this is it! How do you give someone life in prison for stealing a slice of pizza or for selling or smoking marijuana (which has happened), and give Manafort less than four years in prison for being convicted on eight counts of bank and tax fraud?

The scales of justice are skewed.

 Sen. Cory Booker decried the sentence saying, “One of my friends says we have a criminal justice system that treats you better if you’re rich and guilty than if you’re poor and innocent.”

In justifying the light sentence that he handed to Manafort, Virginia Judge T.S. Ellis III said that Manafort had lived “a blameless life,” before committing his crimes.

When you consider some of Manafort’s experiences and how he made his fortune, this was quite a statement (See the East Palo Alto Today editorial – Lessons we can learn from the career of Paul Manafort, on page 4 of the September 2018 issue.).

Harvard law professor Lawrence Tribe tweeted, Judge Ellis’s assessment that Manafort led an “otherwise blameless life” was proof that he’s unfit to serve on the federal bench. I’ve rarely been more disgusted by a judge’s transparently preferential treatment to a rich white guy who betrayed the law and the nation.

Given the sentence, Sen. Kamala Harris declared, ‘The justice system is broken in America.”

Through all of this, one important question stands out: If our justice system is broken, what are we doing to fix it?

Whatever we’re doing, Manafort’s sentence shows that we aren’t doing enough!

But all, who are disappointed or distressed by Ellis’ decision, can still take heart. Manafort still faces charges for a different set of crimes. He will soon be sentenced for these crimes by District of Columbia Judge Amy Berman Jackson and he could get another ten years, which is the maximum time to be given, added to his current sentence.

We’ll see on this coming Wednesday, March 13, Manafort’s next court date, the type of sentence he gets from Jackson.

Lady Justice is, obviously, not blind, but how do we enable her to see more clearly?

--> --> -->