Sheriff Slams Newsom on Crime: ‘Putting Criminals Ahead of Victims’

Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper has launched a pointed critique of California’s crime policies, arguing that the state is prioritizing offenders over victims and failing to implement voter-approved reforms effectively. In a recent interview, Cooper, whose jurisdiction is in Governor Gavin Newsom’s home political territory, expressed frustration that despite public demand for tougher consequences for repeat offenders, state leaders have been too hesitant to enact meaningful change.

Cooper’s Grading of State’s Crime Response

When asked to rate the governor and the state Legislature’s handling of crime, Sheriff Cooper offered a blunt assessment: “Not enough. Not enough.” He conveyed a sense of urgency, stating, “It’s just frustrating that people are hesitant to do anything.” This sentiment comes as California has reported its lowest homicide rate in nearly six decades, a statistic Cooper believes doesn’t capture the full picture. He contends that victims continue to bear the brunt of policies that lean heavily on diversion programs and early release, often at the expense of accountability.

Criticism of Proposition 36 Implementation

A significant point of contention for Sheriff Cooper is Proposition 36, a measure overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2024 with nearly 70% support. The initiative aimed to bolster penalties for repeat retail theft and certain drug offenses while offering a path for eligible offenders to have felony charges dismissed upon completing court-ordered treatment. Cooper lamented that “not one statewide official supported it,” finding this lack of backing troubling.

While acknowledging that the law, as implemented, is showing positive results, such as reported declines in retail theft, Cooper pointed to a critical deficiency: inadequate funding. “The issue is no funding, no funding came with it,” he stated. “It is working. But without funding, it doesn’t go anywhere.” He emphasized that despite the law’s potential, the state has failed to provide the necessary financial resources to ensure its full success.

Concerns Over Diversion Programs

Cooper also voiced strong objections to California’s expanding mental health diversion system. He warned that proposals to broaden the eligibility of theft offenses for diversion could undermine the very intent of voter-approved initiatives like Proposition 36. “It would water it down,” Cooper asserted, suggesting that some lawmakers seem disinclined to hold individuals accountable. Although Governor Newsom recently signed legislation introducing new safeguards for the diversion program, Cooper maintains that it still permits individuals accused of serious offenses to sidestep traditional prosecution.

“Some crimes are so shocking… you shouldn’t be eligible for mental health diversion,” he argued, citing examples such as felony child abuse and crimes involving sexually violent predators as offenses that should preclude diversion. He expressed concern that the current system might allow offenders to avoid the full weight of the law, regardless of the severity of their actions.

Renewed Scrutiny of Domestic Violence Laws

The sheriff also revisited his criticism of California’s domestic violence statutes. He argued that the state continues to refrain from classifying numerous felony domestic violence offenses as violent felonies, even when victims suffer severe injuries. “Domestic violence goes on every day. Doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor. Happens in every neighborhood. We have to treat it seriously,” Cooper insisted.

When questioned about legislative opposition to classifying these offenses as violent felonies, Cooper was direct: “They have no argument. They just vote against it.” This stance aligns with his recent public campaign, where he has argued that classifying felony domestic violence as ‘non-violent’ under California law is a serious oversight that needs correction.

Critique of Youth and Elderly Offender Policies

Cooper has also been a vocal critic of California’s policies regarding youth and elderly offenders, asserting that they have contributed to a systemic reduction in accountability for those who commit violent crimes. His concerns were amplified following the arrest of five young suspects in the fatal shooting of an 18-year-old student. Cooper highlighted that California law often appears to place a greater emphasis on an offender’s age rather than the gravity of the crime committed.

He explained that changes stemming from measures like Proposition 57, along with youth and elderly parole laws, have created a system where serious offenders might secure earlier release based on age, rather than considering the profound harm inflicted upon victims and their families. “The law places limits on how long offenders can be held but takes zero ownership of the damage done to victims and their families,” Cooper wrote. “This is not a system failing. It is a system operating exactly as designed.”

Compassionate Release and Public Safety Concerns

Furthermore, Sheriff Cooper has criticized California’s compassionate release program. His criticism intensified after an individual convicted of attempted attempted cop killing, who had been released early after shooting at Stockton police officers, was later arrested on new weapons charges. Following this incident, Cooper accused lawmakers of disregarding warnings from law enforcement and prosecutors regarding the expansion of release standards. “The experts in the room saw the risks and they were ignored,” he stated. “This is what happens when ideology outweighs public safety.”

A Call to Re-center Victims

In concluding his remarks, Sheriff Cooper emphasized a core principle he believes Sacramento has overlooked: “We’ve got to get back to the victims.” His ongoing public statements and criticisms underscore a perceived disconnect between the state’s legislative direction on criminal justice and the needs and safety of crime victims across California.