The Department of Police Accountability is investigating an incident in which a San Francisco police officer slammed 34-year-old Christiana Porter into a wall during a jaywalking stop in July, the police chief said on Wednesday at a police commission meeting.
Police Chief Bill Scott, who was reluctant to comment on the circumstances that led to incident, did take time during the meeting to explain the rules around jaywalking stops to commissioners.
“If there’s no traffic around, the officers should not be making the stop,” Scott said, explaining a jaywalking law that has been in effect since 2023. He added that “state law is very specific as to when jaywalking is a citable offense: If it is likely to cause a collision. That’s my interpretation.”
Porter, a Black woman and mother of five, was seen on surveillance cameras on July 29 walking down Geary Boulevard and crossing the street, using a crosswalk at Second Avenue. She appears to wait for an oncoming car to turn onto Geary before she begins to cross Second Avenue, when a police car also on Second Avenue approaches her. No other cars appear to be in the immediate vicinity.
As of January 2023, the Freedom to Walk bill became California law, barring police officers from stopping jaywalkers except when there is an “immediate hazard.” The law came about, in part, because of the disproportionate frequency of Black people being stopped for jaywalking compared to whites, and a belief that the stops often functioned as a form of pretextual stop.
The likelihood of a collision, Scott said, would be considered in an investigation by the Department of Police Accountability. “What happened after the stop” would be another element to consider, he said.
Porter, who had headphones on, kept walking when the police car first approached her. Ultimately, Officer Josh McFall exited his vehicle to speak with her — and, after a brief exchange, he grabbed and slammed Porter into the wall.
Asked whether the incident qualified as a permitted jaywalking stop, Scott on Wednesday declined to answer.
“I know what I know, but I don’t think it’s appropriate, while there’s a DPA investigation,” to comment on the case, he said.
Even if the stop were allowed, though, one commissioner wanted to know if it was advisable.
“Especially in this time of critical understaffing, is making stops for jaywalking a good use of this department’s scarce resources?” asked commission Vice President Max Carter-Oberstone.
Scott said that despite limited resources, to address pedestrian fatalities, the police department has tripled its traffic enforcement compared to this time last year; this stop was part of that.
As a result of the altercation, Porter suffered a separated right shoulder and a concussion. She is pursuing a lawsuit against the city.
Technically, she wasnt Jwalking. She was crossing against the red hand. Completely different rule of the road.
sfpd flouts traffic laws with impunity at the intersection of san jose ave and santa ynez. they consistently run the stop sign while traveling in the newly painted red lane.
how can we expect this department to enforce traffic laws when they demonstrate a complete disregard for the safety of pedestrians with children and dogs crossing the street to get to balboa park.
It appears that what little traffic enforcement SF enjoys is limited to pretext stops.
sigh.
The officer involved has a blog (google the name) where he rails against police policies against use of force, high speed no-chases, etc, and while we might agree on some of them it comes off as an “I know better than police dept policy” rant; not at all what you’d want read into a (reckless, unnecessary and illegal) use of force lawsuit where you’re the defendant.
DPA is a total joke, and can’t hold officers accountable even if it wanted too. Staffed by a contracted firm of insurance adjusters and guess what they’re really hired to do?
I had my complaint dismissed by them when sfpd filed an assault w/deadly weapon+Felony hit-and-run (it was intentional) as a ‘Traffic Collision.’ An obvious procedural error, along with denying me access to the report until 6 years passed (statute of limitations for hit-and-run). DPA denied my request for an investigative hearing twice claiming they reviewed the case with several investigators and saw no reason for one, and stood by the findings. A call to DPA to point out the blatant error got this response :Well, we already said no…so no.
That’s some accountability!
There are two things the SFPD doesn’t have: traffic enforcement and cop discipline.
“traffic enforcement”: peds aren’t killing cars, its the other way around; so start citing drivers who act badly.
“Cop discipline”: while the woman dissed the cop (intentionally? unintentionally??), no body-cam should equal Guilty as charged.