Sacramento city attorney won’t prosecute any of the 65 people who violated curfew in June
Sacramento City Attorney Susana Alcala Wood will not prosecute the 65 people who police gave curfew violations the first week of June.
The announcement follows a decision Wood announced earlier this month that she would not prosecute the 42 people who received curfew violations on June 1, the first night of the curfew, which the City Council voted to enact just hours before it started.
The council enacted the citywide curfew, from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m., following two nights of vandalism in downtown and midtown after peaceful protests against police brutality, sparked by the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, had ended.
People who violated the curfew received a summons with a court date and could have been fined $500 or jailed for up to six months.
“The City Attorney’s Office continues to evaluate three cases, in which individuals, in addition to being cited for violating the curfew order, may have been involved in looting, according to information presented in police reports,” according to a city blog post.
“As prosecutors, we have sworn an oath to act with integrity, utilizing balanced judgment to ensure public safety within our communities while respecting the constitutional and legal rights of all persons to protest and petition their government for redress,” Alcala Wood said in a statement in the city blog post.
“We have an obligation not only to pursue appropriate criminal charges when necessary, but also to employ discretion to not authorize criminal charges as certain existing facts and circumstances demand. The curfew was appropriately enacted by the City Council, and direction was given to the police department to enforce it. The existence of the curfew, along with all other measures taken by residents, businesses, community leaders and protest organizers, all served the collective community desire to de-escalate the aggressive violence that was unfolding along with the lawful civil unrest during those first few days. Accordingly, in the interests of justice, it is appropriate to not pursue additional actions against these individuals.”
