SF supes escalate battle with Brooke Jenkins over Walgreens shooting
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution Tuesday urging District Attorney Brooke Jenkins to release evidence — including surveillance footage — that her office collected after a private security guard shot and killed 24-year-old Banko Brown outside of a Walgreens store last month.
Before its passage, however, supervisors spent time verbally beating up on Jenkins for her actions in the days following Brown's death.
“I am completely disgusted by the district attorney’s conduct to date on this,” said District 5 Supervisor Dean Preston, who said Jenkins’ initial announcement that she wasn’t immediately bringing charges against the security guard — only to later state the investigation is ongoing — “has the appearance of a really bad cover-up.”
“I want to send a strong message to our district attorney that her words were unartful and ill-conceived,” said District 7 Supervisor Myrna Melgar. “There can be justice still by releasing the evidence and doing what’s right.”
Brown, a transgender Black man, was shot outside of the Walgreens at 825 Market St. on April 27 during an alleged shoplifting incident. Police originally arrested the alleged shooter, Michael Earl-Wayne Anthony, but he was released from custody last week shortly after Jenkins announced that her office would not immediately bring charges. At that time, Jenkins said in a statement that "the evidence clearly shows that the suspect believed he was in mortal danger and acted in self-defense."
She has so far refused to release any evidence that her office has gathered in the days since the shooting — even amid very loud calls for her to do so. One of those calls came from District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton. In response, Jenkins wrote a sharply worded letter accusing the supervisor of interfering with the judicial process, calling him a “non-lawyer.” The letter also said the investigation remains ongoing, something Walton later called a “contradiction” to her initial statement.
During the Tuesday meeting, Walton’s board colleagues blasted Jenkins for that reply letter.
“The tone was very condescending,” said District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan.
“I read it today in my office with my mouth agape; it’s unbelievable the way she spoke to you,” District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen said to Walton.
The resolution the board voted on was sought by Board President Aaron Peskin of District 3, and calls on Jenkins to immediately release surveillance footage, witness statements and police reports.
Jenkins has said such a move would compromise the ongoing investigation, and that if she makes a final decision not to bring charges, she'd provide a comprehensive public report explaining why. Many of the supervisors didn’t buy it, with Preston saying Jenkins herself compromised the investigation by saying the evidence “clearly shows” the guard acted in self-defense in her initial statement.
“Good luck prosecuting that case,” Preston said. “You can be a defense attorney with one brain cell and could just blow up that statement from the district attorney.”
The resolution did hit one snag before passing when District 6 Supervisor Matt Dorsey, a Jenkins ally, sought to add language calling for the release of evidence that is only “publicly disclosable.”
That drew immediate blowback from Ronen, who said that because Jenkins said in her letter to Walton her office is restricted by state law when it comes to releasing evidence, Dorsey’s addition would amount to giving Jenkins an out.
“I just don’t know why we would give her an out when we’re all on the same page this video should be released now,” Ronen said.
Supervisors also challenged Jenkins’ claim that state law is preventing her from releasing evidence. Ronen said that the specific provision of the California Government code (7923.600) Jenkins references “doesn’t actually prevent her from releasing the video, but she’s hiding behind that government code.”
Interestingly, District 4 Supervisor Joel Engardio, who is typically ideologically aligned with Jenkins and Dorsey, also believes that Jenkins has the power to release the video now, stating, “It’s within the district attorney’s authority to decide when to release evidence.”
Also notable were remarks from District 2 Supervisor Catherine Stefani, another board moderate who said, “Whatever the amendment says, I will be happy to support it so we can move toward healing.”
Board President Peskin later asked Dorsey whether he could “live with” his resolution without the “publicly disclosable” language. After Dorsey acquiesced, the board proceeded to vote on passing the resolution, but not before a particularly colorful exchange Peskin had with one of many members of the public present.
After the individual heckled Peskin with, “I don’t like you,” he replied, with his voice raised, “I don’t care whether you like me; I’m doing my job.”
Tuesday's vote was preceded by another round of emotional public comment. Several speakers urged the board to pass Peskin's resolution, and also took the time to slam Jenkins.
"[Jenkins] went out of her way on May 1 to say that, based on evidence that only she has seen, Banko Brown's killer acted in self-defense — showing clear bias and actually aiding the potential defense of the killer in a trial, even if she does file charges," one person said. "It's clear to me that her refusal is deeply tied into her agenda to shield law enforcement from transparency."
Jenkins' office did not reply to an SFGATE request for comment in time for publication.
The resolution wasn't the only escalation of the board's battle with Jenkins: two board members — Peskin and Preston — threatened to use the board's subpoena powers to obtain the surveillance footage directly from Walgreens if Jenkins doesn't release the footage.
"This videotape is going to come out publicly, and it’s only going to get worse the longer this takes," Preston said.
Source: SFGATE
