Outpost Trinidad bureau chief Ted Pease files the following dispatch:

The No King’s movement comes to Trinidad, in front of Barbara Snell’s house. Barbara, 94, has been flying the American flag upside down for the past year. Flying the flag upside down means emergency or help.

A small but feisty group waved to passing vehicles as they honked and hooted.

I’m sure this is not the smallest No Kings demonstration, but we’re proud of it. Snell, who organized it, got it registered on in Indivisible, which makes it official.

###

UPDATE: Also McKinleyville! Reader Michael Pazeian writes:

No organized protest. This spot was close to my home. I arrived and within 10 minutes others joined me. Many positive honks and thumbs up from passing cars.

Photos/video: Andrew Goff

UPDATE:

• (PHOTOS) Too Many Photos From Saturday’s ‘No Kings’ Protest in Eureka

# # #

UPDATE, 2:10 p.m.: Fifth Street has just reopened at the courthouse, as the scheduled end time for the massive anti-Trump “No Kings” protest in downtown Eureka this morning has passed.

We’ll make a very rough guess and say that perhaps 2,000 people came out for the demonstration. At the beginning, they were divided between Madaket Plaza, where there were a series of speeches, and downtown at the Courthouse near the corner of Fifth and I.

Things got a little tricky when some of the people from the Madaket marched to the courthouse down the middle of Fifth Street. For a while they were blocking traffic, and the people at the Courthouse took that as a cue to escape from the confines of the crowded sidewalk onto the streets. At that point, the Eureka police made the decision to close the street to traffic.

Shortly after this, an officer parked with his cruiser across the street started to receive some abuse from a couple of protesters. They shouted at him to clear the streets so that traffic could come through, theorizing that the police were trying to keep people from seeing the demonstration.

A woman within earshot protested that she wanted to follow the law.

The vast majority of the demonstrators seemed to be on the woman’s side. Though Fifth Street had been officially closed and the block in front of the courthouse was now open ground for pedestrians, they seemed willing to follow the cops’ lead when it came to safety issues.

A couple of blocks away, Eureka Police Chief Brian Stephens said that once there were a mass of pedestrians in the street alongside traffic, they had to shut down the road for safety purposes. He said that protest marshals were doing what they could, but had temporarily lost control. 

Meanwhile, a breakaway group of perhaps 100 people continued to march around the Old Town area in the middle of the streets, followed by a police retinue. They paused in front of the police station at Sixth and C for a while to chant insults at the cops. Later they marched up and down I Street.

At 2 p.m., most of the protesters went home, or elsewhere, and the road was reopened shortly thereafter.

###

ORIGINAL POST:

Downtown Eureka’s Fifth Street is currently closed near the Humboldt County Courthouse as well over a thousand people showed up for today’s “No Kings” protest.

We’ll have more from the scene soon, but you may want to take side streets if you’re just passing through.

Before enjoying Ruth Lake this summer, be sure to clean, drain and dry all gear, boats and trailers to prevent the spread of the invasive golden mussel. The golden mussel, native to East and Southeast Asia, was first documented in California in 2024. Like quagga and zebra mussels, the golden mussel is capable of rapidly spreading, wreaking ecological health and threatening water infrastructure and water quality.

Thomas Jabusch of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Michiko Mares of the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District join the program to golden mussels, their threat, and what you can do to stop the spread of this invasive species.

###

Every time I cross the Eel River just north of Scotia I look over at the Scotia Bluffs rising above the river and think of that perfect swimming hole. It had everything — a beach and river bottom of the softest silty sand, a no-nonsense drop-off which shortened the wade-out time, a diving board, raft, and even a dressing room. The small beach was never crowded. The boys from Wildwood had to swim the river to reach it. The “Scotia kids” had to walk a half-mile of daunting railroad trestle.

There was a period during the middle 1930s, in the depths of the Great Depression, when on warm summer days a group of about a dozen Scotia girls hiked along the railroad tracks to swim at the Bluffs. Some of the ones I remember 70 years later are Beverly and Jeanne Bendorf, Emmy Lou, Lorene and Gladys Grove, Lois MacMillan, Grace Alexander, Hazel Lundquist, Barbara Ball, my sister, Barbara Bendorf, and me. There were some others, and always some younger boys trailing along behind, but never walking with us. Our ages ranged from about 9 years old to 16.

Shortly after dropping down to the tracks below the North Court section of Scotia, we passed the hobo camp, which seems so vivid to me now, even though we were all instructed not to look at or talk to any of the men residing there. The neat compound, located in the trees besides the tracks, was painted barn red, including the fence around it. Shirts and overalls hung from clotheslines stretched between the trees, and large pots of savory stew and soup simmered on outdoor fires. The aroma was delicious. The men would wave and call out friendly greetings. Duly ignoring them, we hurried on our way.

We passed thick stands of stinging nettles and thimbleberries crowding the tracks and soon reached the formidable trestle. I can still remember stepping across the long, curving trestle, railroad tie by railroad tie, high above the river and rocks below — the Bluffs looming ahead on the right. This was logging country and we were all conscious of logging trains. Our trip to the Bluffs took the logging train schedule into account. One train went by mid-afternoon while we were still swimming (we always waved to the engineer from the river) and we were safely back by the time the next one came through.

But as we negotiated the trestle I would figure out what to do if a train did come along. The only solution I could come up with was to head for a somewhat rickety water barrel platform, which extended beyond the trestle at intervals. I figured each platform would hold, besides the water barrel, at least two or three of us, and we would all stand there and wave as the train passed by. No doubt others in the group had the same idea, but the strategy was never needed.

Modern parents may wonder why we young folks were allowed to make such a trek. My mother, for one, had implicit faith in Emmy Lou Grove and Grace Alexander. They were the oldest ones, and both responsible high school girls. And young Bus O’Donnell was often at the swimming hole to watch over things. He was Scotia’s expert swimmer and instructor, and I suspect he saw that there were rafts and diving boards for our use at the popular holes.

The swimming hole was located at the base of the Bluffs. We slid down the steep trail to the sandy beach and headed for the dressing room to change into swimsuits. This was an enclosure of large river boulders and bushes that served the purpose well. Where the boys changed is a mystery.

A diving board was built where the bank was highest, and we spent hours watching the boys’ antics off the board. I can still see Johnny Baratti in his red swim trunks, and Nello and Angie Barsanti, Kenny Dougherty, Gino Benetti, Don Macmillan, Clement Crowley, Nilo Sei, Bruce Alexander, Dale and Gene Livingston, and so many others.

In the meantime the girls were swimming out to the raft and even swimming across the river to the gravel bar side. In those days there was more water in the Eel River at this point, and the current could be swift in the middle. We Scotia kids were lucky because the Pacific Lumber Company made sure we all had access to swimming lessons and water safety and lifesaving techniques, and all who attempted the Bluffs trip were good swimmers. Even so, Hazel Lundquist recalls that on one occasion she was swimming underwater and came up under the raft. There was a moment of panic until she submerged again and came out from under. Sometimes we would climb up the Bluffs and chip out clamshell fossils, which were all over its surface. We had a vague idea the area had once been under the ocean, but hadn’t a clue as to the geologic significance of the formation.

Is Nanning Creek still accessible, and do the boys still fish there? The little redwood sign was just across the tracks from the swimming hole, pointing to the trail that led abruptly into dense green foliage. Why we girls never hiked down that trail and explored Nanning Creek is beyond me. Now I consider it unfinished business. I remember the young anglers of yesteryear that fished Nanning Creek — Sam Pond, Victor Soares, Ross Hill, Ralphie Goddi, George Jones, and others — disappearing down that trail with fishing rods in hand.

Scotia kids were trained to be home by the 5:15 mill whistle. Around four o’clock the logging train passed by, giving us a friendly toot. That was the signal to get out of the water and change for the trip back. There were no plastic bags in those days, so we wrapped our wet swimsuits in our soggy, sandy towels, climbed up the cliff to the tracks and headed home for supper.

On summer Sundays, Scotia families picnicked at other swimming beaches in the area. Gladwood, located just south of the Dyerville bridge, was a great favorite. It is now the Federated Women’s Grove, and its claim to fame is a handsome four-way river rock and redwood fireplace designed by Julia Morgan, who was the designer and architect of Hearst Castle. For years there was a flag attached to the tree at the turnoff into the redwood grove so no one would miss the road. The fireplace is still there, as well as the long half-round log picnic tables. The stellar jays still beg and squawk, and the redwood trees still creak and groan as they sway in the wind. But the sandy beach and river bottom are all pebbles now as a result of the big flood.

Echo on the Van Duzen past Carlotta (now known as Swimmers’ Delight) was another Sunday and camping destination. In the old Echo days, families camped on a flat near the beach. Hazelnut bushes lined the old narrow road to the river, and the children were allowed to ride on the car running board. We swam, gathered hazelnuts, skipped rocks, dove for white rocks and yelled across the river to hear our voices come back to us. We always drove home from these swimming spots with multiple wool swimsuits hanging over the car radiator ornament, along with the old square canvas water bag. Floods and changes in weather have taken their toll on those old swimming holes. There are so many other things for children to do nowadays, perhaps families don’t spend as much time swimming and picnicking along the beautiful rivers of Humboldt County.

I do not recall how many years we swam at the Bluffs — maybe a year or two, maybe longer. I was one of the youngest ones, and I know by the time I reached the eighth grade we were spending most of our swim time at the river bar below the Scotia park. But the image of that perfect swimming hole below the railroad tracks, like the clamshell fossils on the face of the Bluffs, is forever embedded in my memory and a highlight of the many wonderful recollections of growing up in Scotia.

PREVIOUSLY:

• UPDATE: Sheriff’s Office Names Deputy Who Shot and Killed Suspect in Cutten Incident Last Month
• The Cutten Man Shot by Deputies in Critical Incident Nearly Two Weeks Ago Died on Friday, Sheriff’s Office Says
• Sheriff’s Office Issues Statement on Today’s Shootings in Cutten
• (UPDATING) Deputies Shoot Man Believed to Have Shot Elderly Woman in Cutten This Morning; Fern and Cedar Streets Closed
• Sheriff’s Office Releases Body Cam Footage of a Deputy Fatally Shooting an Armed Man in Cutten in April

###

Press release from the District Attorney’s Office:

District Attorney Stacey Eads has completed her extensive review of the investigation regarding the April 25, 2024, Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) Officer-involved shooting of 32-year-old Kevin Jeffrey Burks. A Humboldt County Critical Incident Response Team, with members from the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office, Eureka Police Department, Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office, Arcata Police Department, Fortuna Police Department, California Fish & Wildlife, Ferndale Police Department, and California Highway Patrol, conducted the investigation. Additionally, the Humboldt County Coroner’s Office contributed to the investigation.

The following summarizes the facts derived from the investigation, as well as applicable law and legal conclusions of the District Attorney regarding this incident.

Factual Summary

On April 25, 2024, at approximately 10:00 in the morning, 75-year-old Phyllis Coy met with her sister, Aileen, and an acquaintance, Mike, regarding maintenance work on Ms. Coy’s house, located at 2450 Fern Street, Eureka. After meeting up, Mike and her sister waited in front of the entrance to the house while Ms. Coy unlocked the door. For unknown reasons, a male stranger approached them. Ms. Coy and her sister recall they saw the stranger a bit earlier that day waving his arms in the air as they drove to Coy’s residence. After he came up the walkway towards Coy’s residence, he simply stood there and Aileen asked him if she could help him. He did not respond, and according to Aileen he “just stood there like a statue”. They told him to leave, and he eventually walked away. However, the man returned to the front door a second time.

Coy’s sister recalls during this second encounter the stranger said, “Don’t you recognize me?” She photographed the stranger, and he again left after they told him they would call the sheriff. Coy, her sister and Mike all stayed inside and discussed work that needed to be done for about ten minutes. Mike soon departed. The sisters worked inside a bit longer before they prepared to leave. They discussed reporting the stranger to law enforcement.

Just before 10:30, Coy’s sister locked the front door while Coy began walking towards their car parked on the street. Coy saw the stranger again, “angling like he was coming back toward the house” so she pulled out her phone and called 911. He then disappeared from her sight as he went behind her sister’s car. He reappeared at the front of the car, now with a gun in his hand. Coy yelled out, causing Aileen to direct her attention towards Coy and the armed man. The man raised the gun and shot Coy twice. Coy fell to the ground. The shooter fled on foot.

After being shot, Coy stayed on the 911 call reporting key information including that she’d been shot twice, the description of her shooter, and locations. Likewise, Aileen who saw the stranger point his pistol and shoot her sister causing her to collapse, called 911 reporting the incident immediately after getting to safety inside the residence.

Dispatch logged Coy’s 911 call as received at 10:31:23 in the morning of April 25, and Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) deputies were dispatched to respond to the Fern Street residence at 10:32:32. Multiple deputies logged as enroute to the scene at 10:33:37.

HCSO Deputy Travis Rogers and Lieutenant Conan Moore, logged as enroute at 10:34:29 to Coy’s location, were the first law enforcement personnel to arrive in the vicinity of the reported shooting. Deputy Rogers drove his marked HCSO truck with Lt. Moore riding as his passenger along Cedar Street towards Fern when they saw a man matching the description of Coy’s shooter walking on Fern Street. Both Deputy Rogers and Lt. Moore wore clothing identifying them as law enforcement. Deputy Rogers pulled his truck up approximately 20 feet behind the man and parked.

The man, later identified as 32-year-old Kevin Jeffrey Burks, was walking away from where Lt. Moore and Deputy Rogers parked. At 10:38:22, the deputies are logged by dispatch as possibly out with the shooting suspect. Lt. Moore armed with a Colt M4 Carbine patrol rifle and Deputy Rogers with his 9 mm pistol, exited the truck and drew their weapons while directing Burks to stop and show his hands. Body worn camera captures Lt. Moore yell “Sheriff’s Office, stop! Show me your hands!” Burks turns towards them, and according to Deputy Rogers, he “smiled or giggled” then ran into the 2437 Fern Street residence (later determined to be his home). Suspect having fled into 2437 is logged at 10:38:55. During this initial encounter neither deputy saw anything in Burks’ hands.

Moments later, Deputy Truex arrived in a HCSO patrol vehicle, which he parked with the driver side closest to the sidewalk immediately in front of 2437 Fern Street to provide protective cover for Lt. Moore and Deputy Rogers while they maintained sight on the front of the house. To develop a perimeter around Burks’ location Deputy Truex was directed to position himself at the rear of the residence.

While 911 dispatch communications continue with Coy, as well as Aileen, additional calls are made, including from a female neighbor who calls 911 and assists Coy. Both women are outside by Coy’s side in her driveway at 10:39:11. Medical instructions are provided to assist Coy as they await arrival of first responders.

Body worn camera (“BWC”) worn footage obtained by Deputy Rogers depicts Lt. Moore position himself in the open passenger side door of Deputy Truex’s patrol vehicle in less than 50 seconds after Burks flees into the 2437 Fern residence. As additional deputies arrive on scene, Deputy Rogers and Lt. Moore provide direction and maintain armed cover of the front of 2437 Fern from their positions next to the patrol vehicle. At one minute and 24 seconds into Deputy Rogers’ BWC footage, within 40 seconds of Lt. Moore and Deputy Rogers taking position, Deputy Rogers exclaims “Show me your f***’ng hands! Show me your hands!” Simultaneously, Lt. Moore is heard yelling “Show me your hands!” Three seconds later, at 1 minute and 26-27 seconds into the BWC footage, Deputy Rogers says “He’s got a gun.” Gunfire, three shots from Lt. Moore’s rifle, immediately follows at 1 minute 27-28 seconds into Deputy Rogers’ BWC footage.

Lt. Moore describes Burks as he “just comes straight out…I see him, he has his arm up and is pointing…he’s pointing the gun right at us.” Deputy Rogers describes Burks exiting the residence with a pistol in his right hand. He raised the pistol and pointed it at him and Lt. Moore, and that is when Deputy Rogers yelled out “he’s got a gun.” Lt. Moore describes hearing Deputy Rogers yelling out “gun”. Lt. Moore thought Burks was going to kill him and Deputy Rogers, so he fired his rifle at Burks.

During the next 10 seconds, the deputies converge on Burks who now lays on his back bleeding just outside the front door of 2437 Fern Street, report shots fired, and request emergency medical assistance. Deputy Rogers uses his foot to slide a black Glock 23 semi-automatic pistol lying next to Burks’ right side away from Burks. Deputies place Burks, on his stomach and handcuff him. Immediately after the residence is cleared of any other potential persons or threats, approximately 4 minutes after Burks first fled into his residence, multiple deputies begin rendering lifesaving efforts to Burks.

Deputy Truex quickly retrieved a medical trauma kit from his patrol vehicle. Sergeant Leipzig packed gauze into the actively bleeding apparent gunshot wound on Burks’ neck. While maintaining significant pressure on the neck wound, Sgt. Leipzig monitored Burks’ pulse which rapidly weakened and dissipated. Deputy Rogers and Sgt. Leipzig began administering chest compressions until Humboldt Bay Fire and City Ambulance personnel arrived and began administering lifesaving efforts to Burks.

At 10:40:13, dispatch logs indicate Coy’s sister, still on the line with 911 dispatch, reports hearing shots fired; shots that she believes were by the Sheriff’s deputies taking the suspect to the ground. She describes seeing the suspect on the ground and four deputies. At 10:41:47, Aileen reports Coy is “shaking but she’s still awake and talking.”

At 10:43 deputies arrive to provide medical assistance to Coy, finding her lying on her right side on the ground in front of the garage door at 2450 Fern Street with her neighbor and sister. Additional emergency medical aid personnel was with Coy for her gunshot injuries by 10:45. Coy survived after being shot twice, once in the chest and once in the right elbow. Extensive medical treatment and rehabilitation assisted in her recovery.

Burks was transported to St. Joseph’s hospital and treated at the emergency department for “multisystem trauma” from gunshot wounds. During the initial operating room examination, the doctor observed a gunshot to his front right shoulder and the front left base of his neck. Further treatment was provided at the intensive care unit, however, despite lifesaving efforts, on April 27, Burks succumbed to his injuries and was pronounced brain dead by Dr. Anagnostou. On May 10, Dr. James Olson, Forensic Pathologist, performed an autopsy on Burks and determined a gunshot wound to the upper chest, severing the carotid artery, caused Burks death.

Prior to April 25, Burks suffered from severe epileptic seizures and in March underwent brain surgery as part of a treatment plan to help alleviate frequency and severity of his seizures. Burks’ long-term physician, a neurologist treating his epilepsy, and who was aware of Burks’ medical history (including emergency department records from an April 24 visit by Burks), as well as Burks’ personality and behaviors, opined Burks was experiencing either “post ictal psychosis” or, possibly, “ictal psychosis”. Burks’ neurologist opined in a written communication to Burks’ family member that “if Kevin (Burks) took a gun and shot at a random elderly lady, this behavior was unequivocally related to adverse effects of his epilepsy on his thinking and judgement.”

At the time of the incident, Deputy Rogers had 16 years of law enforcement experience, with his employment as a HCSO deputy beginning in 2017. He carried his Glock 17, 9mm pistol, and two 9mm pistol magazines, as well as a rifle magazine. Following the incident, his firearm was examined by detectives and found to be loaded to capacity with 18 rounds of department issued 9mm hollow point, Hornady brand ammunition. His magazines were loaded with 15 rounds of ammunition. No shots were fired by Deputy Rogers during this incident.

At the time of the incident, Lt. Moore, a trained firearms instructor with 15 years of law enforcement experience with the HCSO, was armed with a pistol and department issued Colt M4 Carbine patrol rifle. The rifle was loaded with Hornady .223 rounds. Three Hornady .223 casings recovered on the ground in the street in front of 2437 Fern were determined by Senior Criminalist Dale Cloutier of the Department of Justice to have been fired by the Colt patrol rifle used by Lt. Moore. During this incident Lt. Moore fired three consecutive rounds from the rifle.

Two expended bullets, recovered from the front area of the 2450 Fern residence where Coy was shot by Burks, and Burks’ Glock 23 handgun were also forensically examined by Sr. Criminalist Cloutier. He determined the expended bullets could have been fired from Burks’ Glock or “any other firearm with similar class characteristics.” When seized by law enforcement at the 2437 Fern incident scene, the Glock 23 had 1 round of .40 S&W caliber in the chamber and 10 rounds of .40 S&W caliber in the magazine. The Glock 23 was test fired and found functional by Sr. Criminalist Cloutier.

BWC footage with audio was captured by Deputy Rogers starting immediately after Burks fled into his residence. BWC footage without audio was captured by Lt. Moore starting approximately 90 seconds before deputies contact Burks and tell him to stop and show his hands. Immediately after Lt. Moore fires shots at Burks, his hand becomes visibly close to the camera and the audio turns on for the BWC footage he captures from that point forward. After Lt. Moore clears the 2437 Fern residence, he walks out the front door towards the street while advising officers that he was the one that shot Burks. He informs on scene officers that he is placing his rifle in Deputy Truex’s patrol vehicle and footage depicts him doing so. Lt. Moore’s BWC footage, still with audio, continues with Lt. Moore standing in the street for approximately 30 more seconds before he turns off his camera.

The Law

Under California law, an officer is justified in using deadly force when they reasonably believe, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person. Moreover, officers need not retreat or desist from their efforts due to resistance or threatened resistance.

Pursuant to Penal Code section 196, homicide committed by peace officers is justified when the peace officer’s use of force complies with Penal Code section 835a. Thus, the most pertinent law in this situation is Penal Code section 835a, which states the following:

(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

— (1) That the authority to use physical force, conferred on peace officers by this section, is a serious responsibility that shall be exercised judiciously and with respect for human rights and dignity and for the sanctity of every human life. The Legislature further finds and declares that every person has a right to be free from excessive use of force by officers acting under color of law.

— (2) As set forth below, it is the intent of the Legislature that peace officers use deadly force only when necessary in defense of human life. In determining whether deadly force is necessary, officers shall evaluate each situation in light of the particular circumstances of each case, and shall use other available resources and techniques if reasonably safe and feasible to an objectively reasonable officer.

— (3) That the decision by a peace officer to use force shall be evaluated carefully and thoroughly, in a manner that reflects the gravity of that authority and the serious consequences of the use of force by peace officers, in order to ensure that officers use force consistent with law and agency policies.

— (4) That the decision by a peace officer to use force shall be evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation, based on the totality of the circumstances known to or perceived by the officer at the time, rather than with the benefit of hindsight, and that the totality of the circumstances shall account for occasions when officers may be forced to make quick judgments about using force.

— (5) That individuals with physical, mental health, developmental, or intellectual disabilities are significantly more likely to experience greater levels of physical force during police interactions, as their disability may affect their ability to understand or comply with commands from peace officers. It is estimated that individuals with disabilities are involved in between one-third and one-half of all fatal encounters with law enforcement.

(b) Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use objectively reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance.

(c) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a peace officer is justified in using deadly force upon another person only when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary for either of the following reasons:

— — (A) To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person.

— — (B) To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended. Where feasible, a peace officer shall, prior to the use of force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly force may be used, unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe the person is aware of those facts.

— (2) A peace officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, if an objectively reasonable officer would believe the person does not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or to another person.

(d) A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist from their efforts by reason of the resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested. A peace officer shall not be deemed an aggressor or lose the right to self-defense by the use of objectively reasonable force in compliance with subdivisions (b) and (c) to effect the arrest or to prevent escape or to overcome resistance. For the purposes of this subdivision, “retreat” does not mean tactical repositioning or other deescalation tactics.

(e) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

— (1) “Deadly force” means any use of force that creates a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury, including, but not limited to, the discharge of a firearm.

— (2) A threat of death or serious bodily injury is “imminent” when, based on the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable officer in the same situation would believe that a person has the present ability, opportunity, and apparent intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person. An imminent harm is not merely a fear of future harm, no matter how great the fear and no matter how great the likelihood of the harm, but is one that, from appearances, must be instantly confronted and addressed.

— (3) “Totality of the circumstances” means all facts known to the peace officer at the time, including the conduct of the officer and the subject leading up to the use of deadly force.

Legal Analysis

On April 25, 2024, when Lieutenant Moore discharged his rifle, shooting at Burks, he justifiably used deadly force. The use of deadly force was legally justified because the deputies were confronted by a situation where they reasonably believed the use of deadly force was necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury, a threat posed by Burks, armed with a Glock handgun pointed directly at the deputies.

From the first moment of Burks’ encounter with deputies, he fled into the residence demonstrating his refusal to comply with lawful orders of peace officers. Moreover, he matched the description of a man who just shot a 75-year-old woman twice with a black handgun outside her home in that very neighborhood. When he first fled into his home, neither deputy saw anything in Burks’s hands, however, when he emerged from his home less than a minute later he held a loaded Glock pistol in his right hand, raised it and pointed it at the deputies. Clearly, Burks presented an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the deputies, and potentially any other person nearby. Lt. Moore applied his experience and training in making the split-second decision to fire shots at Burks before his or Deputy Rogers lives were taken by the armed gunman before them.

Under the totality of the circumstances, Lt. Moore reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to defend against Burks who demonstrated the present ability, opportunity, and apparent intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officers. Therefore, Lt. Moore was legally justified in using deadly force to defend himself and Deputy Rogers against the imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury Burks posed.

Conclusion

District Attorney Stacey Eads has concluded the shooting was legally justified, in that the Lt. Moore’s actions complied with California Penal Code Section 835a. District Attorney Eads has notified Mr. Burks’ family of her findings and legal determination.

###

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

The California Legislature passed a state budget today that relies more on borrowing than spending cuts to close a projected $12 billion deficit, aiming to push off difficult decisions about priorities even as that gap is only expected to grow in future years.

The $325 billion legislative spending plan, which was approved by the Democratic majority along largely partisan lines, is something of a formality, because lawmakers are constitutionally required to pass a balanced budget by June 15 or forgo their pay.

Having rejected many of the cuts to social services that Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed last month to stabilize California’s finances long-term, they must now negotiate a compromise in the coming weeks, with the July 1 start of the fiscal year looming.

The two sides remain billions of dollars apart, particularly on Medi-Cal, the state’s health insurance program for the poor, as well as home health services, public transit, higher education and raises for state workers.

Democratic leaders said they want to delay painful cuts by a few years to give themselves more time to find another solution that doesn’t “balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable” — and perhaps, as one lawmaker put it this week, wait for a “miracle” turnaround in California’s economy.

“The worst outcome here, though, would be to make cuts that we ultimately realize we didn’t need to make — to throw people off safety net programs and then come back and realize, you know what, the projections were off, that wasn’t something that was necessary,” Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, the Encino Democrat who chairs the Assembly budget committee, told reporters after the vote. “We could be in a totally different world six months from now.”

A major point of contention is Medi-Cal, which is driving a large portion of the deficit. The state expanded services significantly in recent years and costs are now rising faster than anticipated after more new patients enrolled than projected. Lawmakers allocated billions of dollars in additional funding to the program this spring to keep it solvent.

Newsom proposed major changes to address those structural issues, including freezing enrollment for adults living in the country illegally, who became newly eligible last year, as well as adding a $100 monthly premium and cutting long-term care and dental benefits for those who maintain their coverage. The governor also wants to eliminate coverage for weight loss drugs like Ozempic and reinstate a strict asset test for seniors, which was recently eliminated.

The Legislature has accepted some of those proposals, such as the enrollment freeze and stopping coverage of weight loss drugs, and scaled back others, including the asset test. Lawmakers want to lower the monthly premium for undocumented immigrants to $30, give those who lose their Medi-Cal coverage because they cannot pay it a chance to re-enroll, delay cutting their dental benefits and maintain their long-term care benefits.

Even that potential compromise has been anathema to some Democrats, who spoke out against what they deemed a “two-tiered health care system” during the floor debate, urging a no vote or asking the Legislature to instead consider raising taxes on billionaires.

“We cannot contribute to the fear and suffering of communities across our state, and I implore us to consider alternatives,” said Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, an Arleta Democrat, who was nearly in tears as she told her colleagues that she was offended by the budget bill.

The legislative plan also rejects a Newsom proposal to cap overtime hours for in-home supportive service providers and eliminate those benefits for adults living in the country illegally.

It restores funding the governor had sought to eliminate for family planning clinics; the University of California, California State University and student financial aid; and public transit. It moves forward with $767 million in raises for state employees that Newsom asked to pause and introduces funding for other legislative priorities, including more than $900 million for affordable housing construction and mortgage assistance for first-time homebuyers. It proposes lending up to $1.75 billion from the state for local governments in Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay Area transit agencies dealing with their own budget crunches.

All of that would add billions of dollars in spending, next year and ongoing, above Newsom’s plan — which already relies on shifting money meant to pay for climate projects and Medi-Cal provider reimbursements, and pulling $7.1 billion out of a rainy-day reserve fund to close the revenue gap. To pay for it, the Legislature seeks to borrow even more from state special funds.

Their approach could be difficult to maintain given the state’s grim fiscal outlook, with an annual budget shortfall projected to grow to $30 billion within the next three years. Turmoil in the stock market and key California industries caused by Trump’s sweeping new tariffs, as well as anticipated federal funding cuts, could deepen that hole.

“This budget was really passed on a hope,” state Sen. Roger Niello, a Roseville Republican who serves as vice chair of the Senate budget committee, told reporters. “A budget that is passed on hope is a budget that is destined for trouble.”

Out of touch with Californians on spending?

And it increasingly does not reflect the will of California voters.

The Public Policy Institute of California has been surveying residents since 2003 on whether they prefer having higher taxes and a state government that provides more services or lower taxes and a state government that provides fewer services.

While Californians narrowly expressed a preference for higher taxes and more services for more than 20 years, that has recently flipped. PPIC’s latest survey released this week found that 55% of Californians now would rather have lower taxes and fewer services — although that is only true of about a third of Democrats.

The survey also found that 56% of California adults think it’s a bad idea to dip into the rainy-day fund to help balance the budget, even as an equal number support some combination of spending cuts, revenue increases and borrowing. And 58% now oppose providing health care coverage for undocumented immigrants, a complete reversal from when the question was last asked two years ago.

Mark Baldassare, director of the PPIC survey, told CalMatters the shifting political landscape tracks with an increasing number of respondents in recent years who believe the state is headed in the wrong direction and that there are bad economic times ahead.

“There’s so much pessimism about what the year ahead might look like, both in California and the nation, that there’s really a desire to shrink down the size of government and expectations that we had previously,” he said. “Voters are just not convinced that we’re not going to be in times where we can afford all the things that we want from government.”

A few Democrats agreed during the floor debate today that California needed to “right-size” its spending, especially with heavy cuts to federal funding likely coming later this year.

“It is essential that we get our house in order and prepare ourselves to weather the storm,” said state Sen. Catherine Blakespear, an Encinitas Democrat.

But most defended their plan as striking the right balance between fiscal responsibility and upholding California’s values, generating intense criticism from Republicans.

“Let’s be practical. We can’t be all things to all people, but we can be responsible to the critical issues that make California a great state,” said Assemblymember Diane Dixon, a Newport Beach Republican, who cited wildfire management and home health services as priorities that the Legislature should focus on funding. “We can’t be perfect, which means we can’t do everything.”

[Ed. note: The following letter was submitted to the Outpost by Attila Gyenis, whose enthusiasm for Dolly Parton and literacy had more Humboldt residents than we’re proud to admit wondering if the country music legend was actually bumming around Old Town last week.]

Greetings All,

Let me start with a clarification and apology. Dolly Parton is NOT going to be at Friday Night Market in Eureka.

As a result of the wording in the previous press release, some people and news agencies thought that Dolly would show up in person. It was just an unsuccessful attempt to be playful by letting people know there would be a life-size cut-out of Dolly there. Since I was the originator of the previous press release, I would like to apologize to those individuals who thought Dolly would be there in person. Mea culpa.

The Imagination Library will be tabling at Eureka Books on Friday, June 13th, to let parents know about the Dolly Parton Imagination Library. And to collect donations. To make the book dreams a reality, the Bridgeville Community Center needs to raise $25,000 a year from the community every year. We have over 1,500 Humboldt County children currently signed up, and have mailed out over 29,000 books since 2023.

We need the community’s help in making these book dreams come true for our children and create a legacy that will benefit the child, and the community.

If you have a child who would like to sign up (the program is free to the families), please visit: ImaginationLibrary.com

If you would like to donate to make these book dreams possible, please go here.