Overview: The trial of Kevin Epps, a Black man accused of murder in San Francisco, has exposed the contradictions and manipulation of truth within the city’s justice system. The prosecution attempted to portray Marcus DeLeon Polk, the man Epps killed, as harmless, but evidence presented by the defense revealed a history of violence and criminal activity. The trial also highlighted the judge’s bias and collaboration with the prosecution, leading to accusations of prosecutorial misconduct and judicial error. The jury’s verdict, which is expected soon, will determine whether justice can still be trusted in San Francisco.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!Malik Washington
The trial of Kevin Epps illustrates and highlights contradictions not easily recognized or embraced by citizens who live in the City of San Francisco.
An editor of an historic national Black newspaper, a newspaper that has confronted injustice and racism in this city for decades has become the target of a modern day lynching in one of the most progressive cities in the United States of America.
Wednesday morning, December 10, 2025, San Francisco stands on the precipice of a verdict—but it is not only Kevin Epps whose fate hangs in the balance. Something far more profound is being deliberated behind the closed doors of Department 13: The credibility of our justice system, the integrity of the courtroom, and the moral compass of a city that claims to champion fairness.
On Tuesday, December 9th, the jury began deliberations after receiving final instructions from Judge Brian L. Ferrall. A verdict could arrive at any moment. But before it does, the people of San Francisco deserve to understand exactly what unfolded in this courtroom—and what it reveals about power, truth, and the dangerous ease with which justice can be manipulated.
I have been in that room from gavel to gavel. And what I witnessed demands to be told.
The truth they tried to bury. The real history of Marcus DeLeon Polk
On Monday, December 8th, the defense delivered a presentation that pierced straight through the prosecution’s carefully constructed narrative. It was not sensationalism. It was not theatrical. It was evidence—the prosecution’s own evidence—laid bare before the jury.
For weeks, Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Jonathan Schmidt portrayed Marcus Deleon Polk as a harmless, down-on-his-luck man, a mellow presence who walked into 137 Addison with no malice, no history of violence, and no reason for anyone to fear him.
But the truth—buried in police files, court dockets, parole records, restraining orders, and years of documented violence—told a wildly different story: Multiple domestic-violence convictions; criminal threats; lewd acts with a minor (PC 288(c)(1)); Methamphetamine use and distribution; vandalism, robbery attempts, threats to kill; resistance and obstruction of officers; 30+ arrests and approximately 30 parole violations.
This is not conjecture. This is the record.
Marcus Polk was not a passive bystander. He was not a gentle visitor minding his own business. He was a man whose history demonstrated volatility, danger, and unpredictability—factors essential to any honest analysis of self-defense. Yet, the prosecution worked relentlessly to obscure this record from the jury, softening Polk into a man he never was.
Collusion in the courtroom: When the bench becomes a partner to the prosecution
It is hard enough to confront prosecutorial misconduct. It is harder still when the bench—the supposed guardian of neutrality—participates in sustaining it. This is precisely what unfolded in Department 13.
Judge Ferrall repeatedly overruled defense objections that should have been sustained. He signaled disbelief in self-defense before the jury ever deliberated. He allowed Schmidt to offer inferences unsupported by evidence. He minimized or restricted key context about Polk’s violent past. He permitted distortions to remain uncorrected.
This was not judicial discretion. This was judicial partnership.
Monday’s mistrial motion: The moment the room felt the truth
During Monday’s closing argument, Schmidt crossed a line so sharply that even the subdued gallery let out a collective breath. He again urged jurors to believe that Polk posed no threat inside the home—a claim directly contradicted by history and evidence.
Defense attorney Darlene Bagley Comstedt rose and moved for a mistrial, accusing Schmidt of presenting arguments not supported by evidence; making knowingly false inferences; acting in bad faith; and violating Epps’s constitutional right to a fair trial.
Ferrall denied the motion. But the moment awakened the courtroom. It was as if everyone finally saw how far the scales had tipped.
A Justice4KevinEpps statement later named what we all witnessed: prosecutorial misconduct and judicial error, plain and simple.
A prosecution in retreat and a jury sent to deliberate
On Tuesday, Schmidt attempted to repair the damage in his rebuttal. But the defense’s exposure of shifting witness statements—2016 to 2019 to 2025 to the stand—had already fractured the prosecution’s credibility.
By yesterday afternoon, Judge Ferrall read the instructions, and the jury began deliberations.
A message to District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
District Attorney Jenkins,
San Francisco cannot accept a justice system that hides truth behind selective storytelling. ADA Schmidt misrepresented Polk’s history; suppressed critical facts; invited the jury to believe a version of events unsupported by evidence; and worked in tandem with a judge who repeatedly cleared the runway for distortions.
This was not justice. This was collusion. And the people of San Francisco deserve better.
What is really on trial
This case is not only about Kevin Epps. It is about whether our courts can still be trusted to tell the truth when the truth is inconvenient.
If a man with three decades of documented violence can be recast as harmless… If a prosecutor can knowingly suppress evidence… If a judge can lean decisively toward the State… If a jury is left to deliberate without the full story… Then justice in San Francisco is not merely compromised—it is endangered.
As the jury decides, a city must reflect
The jurors are now in deliberations. Their decision may arrive today. Whatever the verdict, this trial has exposed a dangerous willingness to manipulate truth in the pursuit of conviction.
A justice system that cannot face the truth cannot deliver justice.
And as long as I am in Department 13, notebook in hand, I will continue telling the truth they tried to bury.
This story is not over. And neither is the fight for justice in San Francisco.
As always, here’s our song/video for this article:
Public Enemy – Fight The Power (Official Music Video.
This story is republished with the permission of Destination Freedom Media Group and The Davis Vanguard. Destination Freedom Media Group and The Davis Vanguard are solely responsible for its content.