Governor claims crime has decreased in California. Fact check: He figured out a clever way to lie.

Governor claims crime has decreased in California. Fact
check: He figured out a clever way to lie. 1

SACRAMENTO, CA- During the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky saga, old Bill famously answered a question with, “It depends on what your definition of is, is.”

This was of course a classic case of playing word games, and it has been perfected by the Democrats over the years.

The latest version comes to us from California’s Brylcreem dude, Gov. Gavin Newsom, who last week made the absurd claim that crime has decreased in the Golden State.

That comes as a surprise to people involved in law enforcement in the state, with Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert telling The Epoch Times:

“You’ve got this tsunami of things that are happening. Violent crime, illegal guns, [and] rampant theft.”

Last week, Newsom was asked about the crime problem in the state and whether or not the state has seen a rise in crime. This is when Newsom took to statistics which are completely irrelevant to what is going on over the past year to eighteen months.

“The evidence doesn’t back it up. Last three decades, we’ve actually seen a significant decline in crime in the state,” he said. [emphasis added]

Well of course, you can cherry-pick a timeline and find that crime in 2021 has declined from 1991. However that doesn’t take away from the fact that violent crime in California’s major cities has exploded over the past year or two.

According to the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), four major cities in the state have seen a vast increase in homicide and car thefts. Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego and San Francisco have seen a tremendous spike in crime following a drop last March when the coronavirus pandemic started.

For example, PPIC noted that last year, Los Angeles saw a 40 percent increase in homicides; Oakland reported a 36 percent increase, while San Francisco and San Diego saw increases of 41 to 48 percent and 50 percent to 55 percent respectively.

In January and February of this year, violent crime fell around 12 percent compared to 2020. PPIC said fewer robberies and aggravated assaults contributed to that decline.

However Schubert railed against policies by progressive Soros-funded DAs that are making California a much more dangerous place.

“You’ve got the Los Angeles DA [George Gascon], who’s essentially doing everything you can do to dismantle the justice system, Schubert said.

“You’ve got a legislature who’s consistently voted for bills that weaken accountability. You’ve got the ballot initiatives that have misled the public, to the point that we’ve basically decriminalized [theft].”

A pending bill, AB333 would remove crimes such as burglary, identity fraud violations, looting and felony vandalism from gang-related crimes.

In addition, Anne Dunsmore, campaign manager for Rescue California blames policies such as Prop 47 for the increase in crime in the state. Prop 47 removed a number of crimes from the category of felonies and downgraded them to misdemeanors.

When passed, that measure will allow offenders already serving time for felonies to become eligible for resentencing.

Dunsmore attributed Newsom’s comments to a shell game, whereby cutting down on the prison population he can claim crime is declining.

“He’s trying to show that he’s cutting down on prison population and that somehow indicates that crime is on the decline,” she said.

Newsom claims there are fewer felons in the state, however Dunsmore attributes that to the fact the state has reduced a number of felonies to misdemeanors.

This past May, in an effort to reduce the number of incarcerated persons, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation announced that under Prop 57, it would increase good conduct credit toward eligible inmates which would potentially grant them an early release.

Out of those eligible to receive the good credits, some 63,000 are in imprisoned for violent crimes, while 20,000 are sentenced to life terms with the possibility of parole.

“You let a lot of felons out of prison, they’re on the streets, there’s a reason that crime is on the rise,” Dunsmore said. “They’re letting all these people out without any structure in place to monitor them or even rehabilitate them.

“For these people [to] sit there and know that their children’s killers could get out, like the guy who killed Michael Lyons” and who also committed aggravated sexual assault, Dunsmore said. “That guy is a model prisoner; he actually qualifies for early release.”

That case involves a man named Robert Boyd Rhoades, who in 1996 was charged with first-degree murder in Sutter County after he tortured and killed Michael Lyons, 8-years-old. Rhoades was a frequent flyer, having committed numerous crimes prior to 1996.

Rhoades was subject to the death penalty, however California’s evolving laws and apparent sympathy toward criminals and not victims may change that.

While some lawmakers in California place the rights of prisoners above victims, not all feel that way.

“Michael’s killer is on death row because he’s a horrific, not just serial, killer [but] his history was atrocious,” Schubert said. “Now we have a legislature that even though the jury has recommended a certain sentence wants to pass a bill that he can petition to get out.”

Continuing, Schubert said:

“It’s despicable when a cop talks about a crime victim and putting them through the wringer. Time and again when they’ve been given assurance that this horrific serial rapist-murderer has been sentenced to never get out of prison.”

Speaking to Newsom, they say denying there’s a problem will not fix it.

“[Newsom] can’t fix a problem if he denies the fact that it’s there, and that’s what he’s doing,” Dunsmore said. “That’s dangerous.”

Civil rights attorney Leo Terrell slammed Newsom, calling him untruthful for his claim that the state has seen a “significant decline in crime.”

Appearing on Fox News Primetime with host Brian Kilmeade, Terrell said that Newsom’s comments “are more proof he lives in the worst state in the country, the worst county in the country [and] the worst city in the country: Los Angeles”

“Prop 47 was a horrific bill—it reduced crimes that you are watching on television from a felony to a misdemeanor. Gavin Newsom is lying to America when he says crime is going down. Where was he last year, Brian? We had riots in California: Every day burning and looting.”

Terrell also laid the blame on Gascon, the George Soros-funded neo-Marxist light on crime LA District Attorney, whom he blamed for his soft on criminals policies.

Terrell also addressed the current recall petition on Newsom, where a sufficient number of signatures were received to force a recall vote by California citizens. He specifically addressed Kamala Harris’s promise to go to California to help Newsom’s effort, which Terrell called a mistake

“Kamala Harris is unlikeable. She is in that category like Hillary [Clinton]. Remember, she ran for president, and she dropped out because she couldn’t get a delegate in California. She was going to lose California,” Terrell said.

“Her coming to California to help Gavin Newsom is a death sentence for Gavin Newsom. I would not want her in this state.

“Everything she touches turns to poison. Look at her trip down to the southern border. She avoided the southern border, Brian, she is the worst vice president ever,” Terrell concluded.

Newsom can spout off about “reduced crime” all he wants, but most intelligent people can see what is happening with their own eyes. Simply put, they’re not buying what Newsom is selling.

For more on California’s legislature throwing down with criminals while endangering the state’s citizens, we invite you to read one of our previous reports. 


CALIFORNIA – Reportedly, Democratic lawmakers in California are seeking to either dramatically reduce, or outright eliminate, certain sentencing enhancements for crimes committed while using a firearm.

While this effort failed to advance through the legislature on May 20th, the proponents behind this effort are intent on moving forward to see this legislation to one day come to light.

Greg Fidell, who serves as the policy manager of Initiate Justice, lamented the fact that AB 1509 did not manage to make it through the Appropriations Committee earlier in May:

“AB 1509 was held in the Appropriations committee and will not move forward this year. This is very painful – but we will be back stronger next year. I would like to apologize to all the families and currently incarcerated people who were counting on this. I’m sorry. Truly.”

There apparently were some Democratic state lawmakers who were backing what was known as the Anti-Racism Sentencing Reform Act, which the act meant to reduce the penalization associated with crimes that were subject to sentencing enhancements – such as ones committed with firearms.

Apparently, there is a perception that sentencing enhancements are somehow racist considering that figures show 89% of the approximately 40,000 inmates serving prison sentences with gun enhancements in California are people of color.

With respect to California, possession of a firearm while committing a serious crime, like attempted murder or robbery, means an offender could receive an additional 10 years on top of their sentence for whatever the underlying crime is.

If said firearm is fired during the commission of a crime then the sentencing enhancement could add 20 years on top of an underlying offense, if someone is injured by a firearm – then it could be an additional 25 years to life.

What the failed bill would have accomplished is reducing those sentencing enhancements to a term of an additional one, two or three years maximum – while also repealing gun enhancements for certain lesser crimes.

Restore Justice executive director Jobi Cates alleges that longer sentences for certain offenses don’t “deter crime”:

“There’s ample research that long sentences don’t deter crime. It’s actually the swiftness and the surety of consequences that deters crime, not the length of the sentence.”

“The length of the sentence just costs the state and communities and families hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars and destroys lives. It doesn’t make us safer. It’s a myth.”

Kent Scheidegger, who serves as the legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, refutes that notion posed by Cates, pointing out the obvious that longer sentences for offenders does improve public safety by removing those offenders from the public for an extended period of time:

“The reason they should be sentenced more severely is the use of the gun greatly increases the danger that someone’s actually going to be killed.”

“Certainly a longer sentence for a habitual criminal does improve public safety by preventing them from committing crimes during the time of the sentence.”

Democrat Alex Lee, the main sponsor of the failed bill, claimed that AB 1509 “is about undoing failed policies of systemic racism in our justice system that have led to over incarceration.”

Laurie Palmer, who founded the community group Go Get Your Kid after her son was shot, notes that while some sentences for youthful offenders might be a little egregious – she is also highly critical of the idea of reducing potential 25-year sentences to 1-3 years:

“Reducing a 25-year sentence to one, two or three years – I don’t think so. But 25, that’s too much for some, they’re just kids.”

What Palmer found most troubling of this proposed legislation was the fact that had the legislation passed, then a whole lot of violent offenders would have been walking out of prison at once:

“We already have pretty violent communities right now. If you’re talking about just releasing a whole bunch of violent criminals like right now — no, no, no, no. That ain’t going to go well.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

In other news from California relating to gun crime, the man who reportedly killed a Stockton Police officer earlier in May happened to be a paroled felon. 

Here’s that previous report. 


STOCKTON, CA – The now-deceased suspect authorities say killed Stockton Police Officer Jimmy Inn earlier in May was reportedly out on parole at the time of the fatal shooting.

Authorities say that Officer Inn was responding to a domestic violence call at a residence located within the 4400 block of La Cresta Way on May 11th when the fatal shooting occurred.

Officer Inn was reportedly approaching the front door of the residence when the suspect, identified as 30-year-old Lance Lowe, opened fire – fatally striking the officer.

Shortly thereafter, Officer Pancho Freer had responded to the scene and exchanged gunfire with Lowe, according to officials. The suspect was said to have retreated back into the residence, later reemerging with his 8-year-old son that he was reportedly strangling.

Police say that a bystander had tackled Lowe and rescued the child. Officer Freer opened fire on Lowe again, which the suspect was said to have later died at the hospital from the sustained gunshot wound.

Hours after the fatal shooting, Stockton Police Chief Eric Jones stated the following about the incident:

“It was a violent, blatant and very sudden assault on our police officer.”

While the suspect is deceased, reports have surfaced showing that Lowe had been granted parole back in April of 2020.

Lowe had been given a five-year sentence out of Los Angeles County back in March of 2018 for grand theft auto with use of a firearm.

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation records showed that Lowe had been given 820 pre-sentencing credits and 37 post-sentencing credits, which afforded his release back in April of 2020.

However, officials say that Lowe did serve his full sentence as prescribed by law, as the pre-sentencing credits were doled out due to Lowe having served time in jail while awaiting trial.

Officer Inn’s father, Phalyl Lee Inn, expressed feelings of wishing he could trade places with his son:

“I’d rather it would’ve been me and not my son because I’m older, and he had so much ahead of him.”

Phalyl Lee would like to see some changes within the Stockton Police protocols for officers responding to calls, specifically regarding how quickly additional officers can arrive on a call such as the one where his son was killed:

“Modify maybe, even though it might take a minute for another officer to arrive, to make sure that it’s more secure, maybe that the city might have to take that as consideration.”

The widow of the fallen officer, Tela Inn, says that the loss of her husband is still surreal:

“I just feel like I’m in a fog. It doesn’t feel real. They brought his car home last night and I saw it parked in the garage, but I knew he wasn’t going to be inside the house.”

Officer Inn served the Stockton Police since December of 2015, serving as a member of the department’s honor guard and assigned to the filed operations division.

He is survived by his wife, a 7-month-old son and his two stepchildren.


Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Read the Full Article

GREEN NEW DEAL: Dell Stops Shipping High-End PCs To California, Blue States That Ban Energy-Inefficient Computers
Forget About Decertification – Here's the Real Purpose Behind Arizona's Election Audit

You might also like