Hey Peter. That was a really disturbing incident, but it seems like that controversy comes down to a matter of poor communication with the broader family. The DA’s office clearly has room for improvement here — particularly when the victim is elderly or speaks poor English. They acknowledge they need more resources in this area.

On the other hand, it’s not like the DA’s office did not act in response to this violent act. The assailant spent seven months in jail and is under mental health supervision. According to this article, the treatment programs he underwent seem to have stabilized him and he is “now able to work full-time and live with his family.” While I wish the victim’s whole family had been more in the loop, this nonetheless sounds like a good outcome for the community.

There are lots of unhoused individuals suffering from mental health issues on the streets of SF and we know this sometimes leads to violent or destructive acts. But the science shows that, if we really want to protect ourselves and our neighbors, treatment is often the best answer in these cases. Prison time, by contrast, often exacerbates the underlying condition and makes them more likely to reoffend when they get out a few months or years down the line. To see these individuals locked up may satisfy our desire for harsh punishment, but it doesn’t actually make us safer in the long run.

Personally, I want a district attorney who pursues just outcomes, not simply convictions. Sometimes this is going to mean taking a case to trial, or dismissing bogus charges, or diverting the perpetrator to mental health or restorative justice programs. All of the above can represent a just outcome, depending on the specific circumstances of the case.