Banning Man Acquitted in Beaumont Nightclub Murder

Demario Anton Jackson, 26, was charged with first-degree murder, along with sentence-enhancing gun and great bodily injury allegations, in the July 16, 2011, slaying of 46-year-old Andy Albarran.

A Banning man accused of shooting an unarmed nightclub patron during a scuffle before the defendant was shot and wounded by a police officer was acquitted today.

Demario Anton Jackson, 26, was charged with first-degree murder, along with sentence-enhancing gun and great bodily injury allegations, in the July 16, 2011, slaying of 46-year-old Andy Albarran. The Riverside jury deliberated about two days before reaching a verdict, according to court records.

Jackson did not take the stand in his own defense because he could not recollect details of the night in question, his attorney, Susanne Cho, told City News Service.

"Things are pretty hard to remember when you've been shot twice," Cho said outside court.

The defense maintained that Jackson killed Albarran to protect himself. The prosecution argued it was a cold-blooded murder.

Beaumont police Officer Brent Conan testified earlier that he witnessed Jackson shoot Albarran at point-blank range, from less than five feet away.

Jackson and Albarran were among several hundred people who went to see a live show at Celebrities Restaurant and Cocktail Lounge in the 500 block of Beaumont Avenue on the night of the shooting.

Conan testified that he went to the location to nab drunken drivers leaving the club. The officer said he immediately became aware of a physical confrontation involving several men in the adjacent Wells Fargo bank parking lot.

"I heard what sounded like a high-pitched pop and thought it might be a firecracker or gunshot," the officer testified. "I couldn't tell where it came from. I drew my firearm and continued toward the crowd and saw an older Hispanic man and a younger black man fighting."

According to Conan, he witnessed Jackson fire a bullet into Albarran, striking the victim in the upper body.

"That's when I fired my gun at the shooter," Conan testified.

The officer said Jackson stumbled and collapsed onto the ground and Albarran, struck in a lung and shoulder, staggered backward, stepped off the curb and fell face-down onto the pavement. He was pronounced dead a short time later.

Jackson was shot in the leg and torso. He underwent surgery and made a full recovery.

According to testimony, both the defendant and the officer were armed with .45-caliber handguns.

Brandon said the reason for the altercation has never been determined.

According to Cho, Albarran, his teenage son and the youth's teenage cousin all attacked Jackson over a disagreement that erupted as they left the club.

Angela D Holliday November 02, 2012 at 01:25 AM
You said it concerned citizen, another thug out to kill again.
REYNA November 02, 2012 at 01:41 AM
i was in awe when i heard this news.it was clear in court demario was guilty.Richard you said it bill fox you sound ridiculous oh and no one in court ever said demarios gun was not fired!
Focused November 02, 2012 at 01:55 AM
Justice was served today! None of you came to the trial or seen anything. I have been following these stories as well of all your dumb ignorant comments. The truth came out today and the jury saw it for what it was based on the FACTS AND THE FACTS ALONE. Any normal person of a logical non biased IQ could have came to the same conclusion based on the evidence. Andy was shot in the back period the corners report reflects that. The testimony of the officer says he the DeMario shot him in the gut. Not possible when facing someone face to face. My prayers are with the family but they also got justice because they hopefully now know the truth and can have closure with knowing the truth. My prayers are also with the officer because he needs to come to reality on the fact he is the one who took a human life he should really think and follow proper protocol next time. Anyone who disagrees oh well I don't care you weren't there you didn't take the time to get the actual facts but you sat on your asses behind a computer and read stories that didn't even print the facts they printed what the officer said which didn't even fit the physical evidence. I pray for all of you on here as well because you came to conclusions without trying to think of the facts but then again how could all of you come up with a intelligent conclusion if you didn't have the facts. So sorry your just ignorant of the physical evidence.
Focused November 02, 2012 at 02:03 AM
And no I'm sure none of the city's money was used he actually did rehab a building in downtown Banning. He actually fixed up three buildings. All of which are BEAUTOFUL. One he saved from being knocked down which was a original building he wanted to save. Plus last time I checked contractors don't work for free. The program that gave him money required him to submit receipts before they release funds everything was in different payments and that was after the fact, work had to be performed before money was released. Once again go check your facts before you comment thank you. Its all public record.
REYNA November 02, 2012 at 02:41 AM
thank you FOCUSED for your OBVIOUSLY biased opinion,since your trying to point out how everyone else's is.i sat in court every day of the trial,i didn't know either of the men so sorry for YOU since your just ignorant based on your relationship to demario jackson everyone can the person he is through his criminal record. weather it was the police officer or not who shot albarran,the truth is he is dead,and either person involved gets to walk around untouched.justice was not served.im very sorry for his family and wish him the best.
concerned citizen November 02, 2012 at 03:57 AM
Focused, how dumb are you? If the officer had been the one to shoot Mr. Albarran, ballistics would have proved it. Defense attorneys always have their own spin of things. Just like with the OJ trial. But, just like OJ, once a criminal, always a criminal. Jackson got away with murder this time. He'll do some other crime and get caught and put away for it.
LLODOWN November 02, 2012 at 04:05 AM
Wow! The man was shot in the back! WTH? The officer, wow! All these news reports, but never mention the man being shot in the BACK! C'MON MAN... IF YOUR NOT GONNA REPORT THE FACTS WHY? News reporters SMDH... FOCUSED Good DAMN reporting.
Atty Cho November 02, 2012 at 05:33 AM
Susanne Cho here: I NEVER said my client killed Mr. Albarran in self-defense. Bad news reporting. Jackson shot twice but evidence proved a tree and ground was shot as he tried to stop people from beating him. Jackson & Albarran were FACING eachother when they were both shot. Poor Mr. Albarran was shot in the back twice by the officer, the jury so found. Jackson's bullets recovered at the scene had no DNA, trace, blood, or any other evidence to show it hit Albarran. His family deserve to know the truth too. Please stop saying hateful things when police covered up the shooting and falsely accused Jackson.
Atty Cho November 02, 2012 at 05:41 AM
Poor news reporting: what is the reporter talking about?? There was "no teenage son or teenage cousin" mentioned in trial. I never said that. Why can't reporters report news accurately? No wonder there is so much misinformation out there.
LLODOWN November 02, 2012 at 07:04 AM
@Atty Cho! Good job that's reporting the FACTS! BPD COVER UP...WOW
meek73 November 02, 2012 at 04:10 PM
Wow thats wonderful that Ms. Cho stands behind what she does enough to comment and set the facts straight. The media will only report what they want you to know.
Beaumont Citizen November 02, 2012 at 04:47 PM
Why is the reporting so one-sided. As a person with no connection to the parties involved I followed the case solely through the reporting, and like many readers, the acquittal came as a complete shock. The case appeared to be clear and without doubt, if the news reports were to be believed. If there was evidence that cast questions on the officer's version of events, why wouldn't the ongoing reporting mention this? Certainly a reporter is capable of distinguishing between a fabricated defense smokescreen perhaps not worthy of reporting and tangible evidence to support an alternate hypothesis that should be stated in the trial synopses. Unlike the OJ trial in which a widespread conspiracy was required, this version appears only to have required an officer responding to the sound of gunfire to have felt adrenaline and fear and to have fired in haste and lacking accuracy. As perhaps anyone would in the face of gunshots. I am not saying the officer did so, I have no knowledge of the case beyond the unsubstantiated comments, but if this was the defenses contention, and some ballistic evidence supported it, the news reporters had a duty to report it. Certainly the jury felt the open-and-ahut case was not, and I doubt they are idiots. I too was shocked and outraged that a killer got off, but upon reflection, maybe the outrage should be directed towards the misinformation, if a review of the trial transcript demonstrates the jury acted in accordance with the evidence.
latasha November 02, 2012 at 05:24 PM
he's not a thug went to school with him at the age of 14 started his own business stay to himself and help the young people to have a job GOD was just on his side banning police department always was cricket even when even at the high school having sex with students
Francis De Idiot November 02, 2012 at 07:29 PM
Francis, Is your "Officer of the Year" going to suffer the same outcome Officer Clark suffered after you threw him to the wolves to cover your ineptness as a chief? Are you going to turn your back on him and say he was negligent when in fact it was a training issue. How will you justify and cover up another screw up under your tarnished tenure as Beaumont's Chief of Police? How much money is this city going to lose in litigation because of your arrogance. Can you answer these questions city counsel? Al Kapinicas? Take Chief Sellers example and resign.
nobodyuno November 02, 2012 at 08:47 PM
Who wrote this article??? City news service is not a reporter... The author of this article should man up and put your name on your work.. Both families need to sue the city, the police chief and the officer involved.. The prosecutor in this case is just as liable and should be fired for bringing a case against an innocent person knowing the evidence pointed to the officer as the shooter.. The cop is still on the force and anyone who is approached by this idiot should be very concerned..
Pass Resident November 02, 2012 at 09:00 PM
Please read the article on the Banning Informer, this reporter actually attened the entire trial. Here is a link for quick access http://www.thebanninginformer.com/?page_id=6157
beaumontdave November 03, 2012 at 01:48 AM
One reason for misinformation is poor sentence structure and spelling. I have trouble believing a trial attorney writes like above. Also, when the jury voted for acquittal, are you saying they added " we think the cop shot Andy " to their vote tally? Anyway, based on the pathologist's findings, obviously somethings amiss, and I certainly won't dispute the finding of the people who sat through all of this and rendered a verdict. I hope all parties involved find peace.
Kathleen Martin November 03, 2012 at 03:51 AM
Ms. Cho seems dedicated to making sure folks hear and consider the facts before we form an opinion or judge another....what a concept!
Carol Stull November 03, 2012 at 05:54 PM
Beaumont and Banning cops are "second chance officers" that can't be trusted to tell the truth. That's probably why the DA's office let Brent Conan perjure himself. Maybe he'll end up on the Brady list along side of Lt. Phil Holder - dishonest and making big money. People are creatures of habit and seldom change. Liar, liar pants on fire.
Jim Smith November 03, 2012 at 07:35 PM
Carol, There may be some officers on both departments that have been on other forces, but your assertion that they are "second chance officers" is NOT accurate. Get your facts straight before you make blanket comments...And don't argue because I know for a fact you are wrong!!!
NoContest November 03, 2012 at 08:26 PM
Jackson still has not been on the stand or commented because he knows what he did.Guilty conscience.He's no angel like you pretend to make him out.He didn't testify because he's a COWARD.All reports state the defense's position is that it Jackson killed him in self- defense.Defense or not a man is still dead & a killer with the last name Jackson is free to kill again,how is that justice?Hope he and his family had a good time partying with the cash that belongs to the community.Too bad all focus is on defending him and not reaching out to the deceased's family.
Ken November 04, 2012 at 04:49 AM
...I guess this passes as in depth reporting...(earlier article regarding) "...According to testimony, both the defendant and the officer were armed with .45-caliber handguns. Albarran had no weapons on him...."
Mirna Alfonso (Editor) November 04, 2012 at 05:17 AM
Ms. Cho, just out of professional curiosity, could you tell me which City News Service reporter interviewed you? I am a Patch editor but used to work for CNS so I was just wondering? you can email me.
GeorgeG November 04, 2012 at 08:13 AM
Some of you are so quick to believe what your told by anyone with enough know how to run a blog. This "author" has skewed the details from the very beginning. Some are so quick to call someone a thug and murderer, even going as far as to say God will punish him. Judge not lest ye be judged. Whether he testified or not, he was found NOT GUILTY. My prayers to the Albarran family but Mr Jackson also almost died, do you think it's so far fetched to say he didn't remember the events? The evidence proved that he did not do it. So regardless of the mistakes he made in the past, he did not do this. You can't always trust a "reporter", blog author, or a police officer blindly without question. From the beginning "reports" of what happened were skewed to automatically make Mr Jackson seem guilty. Bottom line is he's not. SO all of you that said thought you were right and had a "we'll just see" attitude.. you were WRONG! Just admit it and move on.
NoContest November 04, 2012 at 04:09 PM
OJ was not found guilty,too. Either way Jackson has to live with his conscience.A not guilty verdict for Jackson does not exonerate Albarran from death.Jackson found as not guilty of murder or guilty of "self-defense" it is the same difference.A man is still dead,a killer is still free and the community's money has still been robbed by a coward and a crook, all done by one name Demario Jackson. Justice has been served for who?Albarran's family still mourns try telling them to their face to move on.SMDH!
Victor S Dominguez November 05, 2012 at 01:00 AM
Mr.Jackson shot and killed Andy in the back. This murder is now free in the pass area. The DA failed in the courtroom and the well funded defense team won their case. This is a sad day for our community. Make no mistake Justice failed our community!The Beaumont Officer did not kill Mr. Albarran, that is what the defense wants us to believe . I for one will advocate for Mr. Albarran
Damchi November 05, 2012 at 03:43 AM
Victor, you are correct. The DA did fail and it does not surprise me. I was on a jury earlier this year at this same courthouse and was shocked at the young lady DA who appeared to be straight out of college. The case was poorly presented and the defendant was found not guilty.
IIBLK November 05, 2012 at 07:20 AM
Two corrupt police departments I hope Jacksons gets millions of dollars for what they put him through. They are reject cops that couldn't make it anywhere else......Last chance for employment Banning or Beaumont....
NoContest November 05, 2012 at 09:05 AM
So it's only about how Jackson was wronged here? Another Jackson relative trying to redirect the blame. What about Alberran's family? Andy was murdered and the only concern is for more money for Jackson? Jackson ripped off enough money from the community already he doesn't need anymore. A known corrupt developer suing an allegedly corrupt PD would be the pot calling the kettle black! Sorry for what Jackson went through getting hospitalized, but why did the 'model citizen' need to illegally carry a gun for in the first place, more developer business deals? What did he expect to do with it that night? Andy is DEAD. MURDERED. How is Jackson the victim here?
Carol Stull November 09, 2012 at 03:19 AM
Spot on. Perjured testimony from "Officer of the Year" at Beaumont. And another "Officer of the Year" at Banning is being investigated for confiscated gun theft even though their Internal affairs officer is on the Brady list for past dishonesty - he'll try to cover it up.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »