Police Identify and Look for Another Suspect in Downtown Shooting

Share:
photo by Robert J. Hansen

by Robert J. Hansen

Sacramento, CA – Sacramento police have identified an additional suspect in last week’s K Street gunfight in Downtown Sacramento that left six dead and twelve injured.

Based on the evidence recovered, it appears Mtula Payton, 27, was among at least five shooters involved in the shooting according to police.

“Our goal is to conduct as thorough an investigation as possible so that the District Attorney has all the information she needs to present cases that will bring justice to the families of the victims and our entire community,” Kathy Lester, Chief of Police said in a statement. “The investigation has moved very quickly in this first week, and it will continue until we can present prosecutors and the public with a complete picture of this terrible crime.”

Payton is wanted on multiple felony warrants, including domestic violence and gun charges police said.

His current whereabouts are unknown at this time.

Detectives have made multiple attempts to locate and arrest him while exhausting all leads.

Detectives believe this shooting was triggered by an altercation between at least two groups of men affiliated with local street gangs.

https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=2Zcj30_0f7Wfgoh00

Vigil for Johntaya Alexander, 21, who was one of six killed during a gunfight that broke out early Sunday morning on April 3, 2022.(Photo by Robert J Hansen)

“Only one gun was recovered at the scene of the shooting and the others were removed before officers arrived,” Police said.

Police are asking that anyone with information about Payton or others involved in the shooting share it by contacting Sacramento Valley Crime Stoppers at the information provided below.

Payton’s warrant for felony domestic violence stems from an incident on the afternoon of April 2, 2022.

Officers responded to the home of a relative of Payton’s and contacted a woman with injuries she said Payton had inflicted.

Officers submitted a report documenting the incident which resulted in the arrest warrant.

“We are examining all aspects of this incident to understand it as thoroughly as possible,” police said.

At this time, evidence indicates that Payton, Smiley Martin, and Dandrea Martin were among the shooters.

Police said that different or additional charges may apply as the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office will continue to review all evidence to determine appropriate charges.

The Sacramento Police Department encourages any witnesses with information regarding this investigation to contact the dispatch center at (916) 808-5471 or Sacramento Valley Crime Stoppers at (916) 443-HELP (4357).

Callers can remain anonymous and may be eligible for a reward of up to $1,000.  Anonymous tips can also be submitted using the free “P3 Tips” smartphone app.

Share:

About The Author

Robert J Hansen is an investigative journalist and economist. Robert is covering the Yolo County DA's race for the Vanguard.

Related posts

15 thoughts on “Police Identify and Look for Another Suspect in Downtown Shooting”

  1. Alan Miller

    Knock Knock

    Who’s there?

    Davis

    Davis Who

    Davis Vanguard wants it’s identity back

    At this time, evidence indicates that Payton, Smiley Martin, and Dandrea Martin were among the shooters.

    DG say they didn’t get charge for shooting.

  2. Keith Olson

    David Greenwald reported yesterday:

    But as it turns out, not only was Martin not the actual shooter

     

    Today the Vanguard reports:

    At this time, evidence indicates that Payton, Smiley Martin, and Dandrea Martin were among the shooters.

    So which is it?  My head is spinning…

     

     

    1. Robert JHansen Post author

      This is new information as of last night. Try to keep up guys.

      And it changes nothing about the false reporting form the Bee about Martin being released early.

      1. Ron Oertel

        This is new information as of last night. Try to keep up guys.

        Interesting way to say, “The Vanguard was wrong, regarding what it reported yesterday”.

        (Reminds me of how a former president acknowledges an error.)

        1. Ron Oertel

          Keep digging.  It’s so much easier when others already include the quote from yesterday:

          But as it turns out, not only was Martin not the actual shooter

          The predictable, defensive response to this claim made (in error) reminds me of someone who claims to have won an election.

      2. Keith Olson

        This is new information as of last night. Try to keep up guys.

        But yesterday David wrote “But as it turns out, not only was Martin not the actual shooter”.

        Notice, David didn’t write : ‘As of now’ Martin isn’t the shooter.   David actually wrote “But as it turns out, not only was Martin not the actual shooter“.  

        So Robert, maybe it’s you who should try to keep up with the conversation here.

        1. Robert JHansen Post author

          🤦‍♂️ Sure whatever you say. I know what David wrote. New information was acquired after his editorial. If that is too difficult to comprehend I don’t know what to say, other than, thanks for reading!

           

           

           

        2. Keith Olson

          I don’t think I’m the one that’s having trouble comprehending.

          I know what David wrote too, I quoted his actual words.

          You can try and dodge it all you want, but you’re wrong.

           

  3. Bill Marshall

    New information was acquired after his editorial. If that is too difficult to comprehend I don’t know what to say, other than, thanks for reading!

    True, as stated… however the thrust of editorial was “jumping to conclusions”, and the wrongness of that… yet, what did the editorial do?  THINK!

    And, what has been ‘left on the table’ is his implied accusation of the Sacramento DA for fomenting ‘the lie’, which has turned out ‘not yet known’… was that “jumping to conclusions”?

    Are you the designated ‘spin-doctor’ for David and the VG, or just a ‘wannabe’?

    Is that too difficult to comprehend (your own words)?

    I am no fan of the Sac DA… the facts of the shooting are still under investigation… ANY assertions made by anyone are questionable… not ‘vetted’… not ‘proven’… yet, David has dismissed a postulation as wrong, on the record, yet now there is a contradictory postulation… and you defend that.

    I say again,

    Are you the designated ‘spin-doctor’ for David and the VG, or just a ‘wannabe’?

    As for me, I’ll make no judgment until more facts are in play…

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for