Stephon Clark: California introduces bill making it easier to prosecute cops who use deadly force

California legislators have responded to the shooting of Stephon Clark with a bill that would make it easier to prosecute police officers who kill suspects.

Mass protests have convulsed Sacramento in the days since police officers shot and killed Mr Clark in his grandparents’ backyard, mistakenly believing he had a gun. Activists have demanded that prosecutors charge the officers who fired 20 times on Mr Clark.

“This tragedy only builds on the mountain of injustice that occurred in this country at the hands of police”, said Assemblyman Chris Holden of Los Angeles, who chairs the legislature's black caucus and spoke alongside Mr Clark's grandfather. “We should no longer be the target practice or the victims of a shoot-first-ask-questions-later police force”, he added.

The bill seeks to diminish how often police officers use deadly force and would make it more likely they face charges when they do. It would allow lethal force only when it is necessary to prevent imminent bodily injury or death and alternative responses have been exhausted.

“Deadly force can be used, but only when it is completely necessary”, said Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a San Diego Democrat. “We're not saying people can't use lethal force, but we're saying there are oftentimes other alternatives”.

Under the current standard enshrined by the US Supreme Court, law enforcement officers can use lethal force when it's “objectively reasonable” to believe they're under threat, a standard that legal experts say offers broad immunity from prosecution.

“It is clear that the current law protects the police, not the people”, said Lizzie Buchen of the American Civil Liberties Union, which is backing the bill. “It allows officers to kill community members when they had other options”.

Tanya Faison of Sacramento’s Black Lives Matter branch, which has helped organise demonstrations in the weeks since Mr Clark’s death, embraced the bill, saying “we need to see repercussions” for Mr Clark's death.

Whether the bill secures enough votes to pass will depend significantly on how politically formidable law enforcement groups react. Organisations representing sheriffs, police chiefs and prosecutors wield significant clout in Sacramento. Representatives of the California State Sheriffs' Association and the California Police Chiefs Association said they not yet seen the bill’s language or taken a position.

The Sacramento Police Department has said that when officers responding to reports of car break-ins encountered Mr Clark, he advanced towards them while holding an object. Fearing for their safety, the department said, the officers opened fire.

But an independent autopsy commissioned by Mr Clark’s family suggested that he was shot several times in the back, according to a medical examiner. Attorneys representing the family said that evidence contradicted the police account and suggested that Mr Clark did not pose an imminent threat. (The Sacramento Police Department declined to comment because its investigation is ongoing).

Earlier in the week, state senators formally commemorated Mr Clark on the Senate floor in an acknowledgement of the surging anger over his death.

“We here in Sacramento are wrestling with what his life represents and how he died”, said state Senator Richard Pan, a Democrat representing Sacramento, adding that “unfortunately, black and brown people often fear law enforcement”.