In a terse, one-page letter, the California Attorney General confirmed that San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ office did not abuse its discretion in declining to file charges against the Walgreens security guard who shot and killed Banko Brown.
Brown was stopped on April 27, 2023, as he was leaving the Walgreens on Market Street near Fourth Street. Brown had allegedly shoplifted some $14.64 worth of snacks; he was beaten and pinned to the ground by security guard Michael Earl-Wayne Anthony. Anthony subsequently let Brown off the ground, stayed in close proximity to him as he gathered his belongings, and then shot Brown once in the chest when Brown lunged and spat toward him.
On May 1, 2023, Jenkins declined to prosecute, stating that “The evidence clearly shows that the suspect believed he was in mortal danger and acted in self-defense.” The DA noted that Anthony claimed that Brown had threatened to stab him, though this threat was heard by no other witness on-scene, and Brown had no weapon in his possession.
“So he’s getting off scot-free?” asked Banko Brown’s incredulous father, Terry Brown, Sr., upon being informed of the AG’s letter. “The whole time [Anthony] had control. [Banko Brown] never had a knife, never showed a knife. How could he be in fear for his life, beat him, and then run up to shoot him? Come on, man.”
The June 7 letter to the Board of Supervisors from Deputy AG Peter E. Flores, Jr., notes that a DA “is given broad discretion to determine whether criminal charges are appropriate in a particular case, because she is the official who has been elected by that County to act as its public prosecutor … We cannot say that the San Francisco County District Attorney’s Office abused its discretion in declining to file criminal charges against security guard Michael Anthony.”
Veteran defense attorney and former prosecutor Randy Knox said it was “excessively timid” for DA Jenkins not to file manslaughter charges against Anthony, and “I think it was timid for the AG to use an exceedingly high standard to avoid responsibility for this case. ‘Abuse of discretion,’ in legal terms, is the highest standard to meet in reviewing court or prosecutorial decisions.”
Flores, in Knox’s view, “is basically saying ‘I don’t want this turd in my pocket.’”
The shooting of Brown — and the eventual release of the footage of his death — ignited bitter protests in San Francisco. Legal observers were deeply confused by the DA’s comportment at the time: Jenkins insisted on May 8, 2023, that she was still open to charging Anthony after dropping charges on May 1 and stating that charging him would be reckless and unethical — and offering up unambiguously exonerating statements for the security guard.
It was very hard to foresee Jenkins’ office, or anyone else, prosecuting this case after that.
In Jenkins’ 25-page report explaining the decision to not file charges, she cited a witness stating that “Anthony shot his firearm approximately 30 seconds after he first pulled it out.” And yet, watching the surveillance video, Anthony fires his gun within five seconds of unholstering it. And, while Anthony claimed Brown threatened to knife him, he never gave Brown space, moving closer and closer to him until planting and firing his weapon at close range.
“Banko Brown’s death deeply impacted me and our city,” Jenkins said today in a statement. “While I wish this tragedy would have never happened in the first place, my office and I carefully reviewed all of the facts and evidence available, and followed the law in making our decision to not charge the suspect in this case. … Although we made our analysis and decision-making plain, for political expedience the Board of Supervisors cynically called for review, rather than help lead our City through this tragedy, creating mistrust in the criminal-justice system and false hope for a grieving community.”
Brown’s father, Terry, said he had expected the Attorney General would intervene in this case. The state office’s decision not to do so has left him shattered.
“I don’t have no faith in this system,” he said. “I don’t.”
I wonder what sort of demands we can make of people put in security positions like this. Let yourself get hurt by someone, to avoid hurting *them* too much? I don’t think in-the-moment self-preservation works that way.
The security guard is not far off from the perpetrator in socio-economic status. It’s weird how we think the security guard has to be a thoughtful, reflective expert, while the would-be-criminal should be free to just go for it.
There was literally no reason to shoot him. As the father stated, Anthony was in control of the situation.
He pulled a gun out and killed an unarmed man.
that’s a ridiculous way to excuse murder.
“I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.”
The real culprit is the status quo system that runs on perpetual class war, and not the specific security guard.
Well, the decision not to charge was a pretty easy one to reach given the video evidence. 0% chance of a conviction.
Why so?
An unarmed man was shot over a petty crime and there was no need for him to escalate that into a life or death scenario.
The video evidence does not exonerate the security guard. The case hinged on the security guard’s claim that Brown verbally threatened to stab him.
Where was the family the day before Banko Brown was shot?
Is there any indication the DOJ might open a civil rights investigation?
Civil rights cases are based on wrongs committed as a result of the victim’s “protected class.” Say what you will about this security guard’s judgment, but do you really think you could prove – beyond a reasonable doubt – that the security guard killed Brown because of his race (they were the same race), or gender (which was probably not perceivable or on the guard’s mind in these few seconds)? A civil rights case won’t be brought absent clearer, obviously motivated wrongdoing.