{"id":78313,"date":"2025-12-31T07:31:05","date_gmt":"2025-12-31T15:31:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/?p=78313"},"modified":"2025-12-31T07:31:05","modified_gmt":"2025-12-31T15:31:05","slug":"hung-jury-mistrial-in-latest-phase-of-epps-trial-as-prosecution-narrative-unravels","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/?p=78313","title":{"rendered":"Hung Jury, Mistrial in Latest Phase of Epps Trial as Prosecution Narrative Unravels"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
By<\/span>Eric Arnold<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/i>
\n
\n
\"\"
Kevin Epps in front of San Francisco Hall of Justice. (Image courtesy of Kevin Epps)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

After the jury reached a\u00a0verdict<\/a>\u00a0in the murder trial of Kevin Epps \u2013 acquitting the 57-year-old filmmaker of first and second degree murder, but finding him guilty of voluntary manslaughter and being a felon in possession of a firearm \u2013 the trial moved into a new phase, as the jury considered aggravating factors that could greatly influence the judge\u2019s sentencing decision.<\/p>\n

In this phase, the jury once again heard\u00a0arguments<\/a>\u00a0from prosecutor Jonathan Schmidt and defense counsel Darlene Comstedt. And once again, Schmidt attempted to portray Epps as a violent aggressor, calling him \u201ccallous\u201d and \u201cvicious\u201d in the 2016 shooting death of 45 year\u2013old Marcus Polk \u2013 despite the fact the jury had already rejected the element of malice in its acquittal on the most serious charges.<\/p>\n

But this time, Schmidt may have overplayed his hand. The jury could not reach a unanimous decision on three of the four aggravation charges. Judge Brian Ferrall sent jurors back to the jury room a second time, urging them to reach consensus. They returned a short time later, still deadlocked. Ferrall had no choice but to declare a mistrial on the three charges and dismiss the jury; the fourth charge will be argued during a later hearing without the jury present.<\/p>\n

Courtroom observers speculated this turn of events may have reflected the jury\u2019s irritation at prosecutorial overreach in a largely circumstantial case. \u201cWhen a jury resists pressure\u2026 it tells us something essential: the evidence has reached its limit,\u201d journalist Malik Washington\u00a0wrote<\/a>\u00a0in the Davis Vanguard.\u00a0Throughout the trial, Schmidt \u201cleaned heavily on inflammatory language,\u201d Washington said. \u201cBut language is not evidence.\u201d<\/p>\n

Attorney Julian Davis, a\u00a0spokesman for Epps<\/a>, believes the prosecution \u201covercharged\u201d the case from the start, engaging in \u201cethically-dubious\u201d and \u201cimproper\u201d actions that continued into the trial\u2019s second phase. \u201cSchmidt once again really crossed an ethical line in terms of how he was presenting to the jury a narrative of events that clearly was not supported by the evidence.\u201d<\/p>\n

One of the more extreme examples, Davis said, happened when Schmidt told the jury that following the shooting, \u201cPolk was crawling across the floor. I mean, there was no evidence of this whatsoever.\u201d<\/p>\n

In Davis\u2019 view, the jury \u201cweren\u2019t buying the prosecutor\u2019s whole narrative from the get-go. I mean, they weren\u2019t buying murder, they weren\u2019t buying premeditation, deliberation, they weren\u2019t buying any of this. They weren\u2019t buying callous disregard or conscious disregard for the value of human life, all these murder-associated mental states.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think this also speaks to the overall takeaways from the trial \u2013 Kevin has always claimed self-defense. And I think what we saw here was a clear case of the prosecution failing to knock out certain elements of a self-defense claim.\u201d<\/p>\n

Davis conceded the prosecution \u201cactually succeeded with a misleading narrative at knocking out one of the other elements of a self-defense claim.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, he said, even the manslaughter verdict may be the result of prosecutorial misconduct and judicial error. The judge may have erred in allowing a jury instruction Schmidt successfully argued for, that the possession of an unlawful handgun by Epps in and of itself amounted to an act of aggression. Case law regarding self-defense doesn\u2019t support that finding, Davis maintained.<\/p>\n

Washington noted that \u201cunder California law, voluntary manslaughter is not a compromise verdict. It requires proof \u2013 beyond a reasonable doubt \u2013 of either intent to kill or a conscious disregard for human life. \u2026 Where was that proof?\u201d<\/p>\n

Jurors did not hear witness testimony conclusively establishing that Epps\u2019 actions were unprovoked. They did\u00a0hear\u00a0<\/a>that Polk had just threatened a maintenance worker and was told to leave before and after barging into the house where the incident occurred. Polk\u2019s own daughter reported hearing a \u201ccommotion\u201d prior to the shooting, and that Epps\u2019 own words were \u201che came at me.\u201d<\/p>\n

Schmidt ignored these statements, insisting that Polk was a welcome guest \u201cin his happy place.\u201d That narrative may have stymied a finding of a justifiable homicide instead of a voluntary manslaughter, Davis said, which \u201cprecisely has to do with this picture of Marcus Polk as a calm and peaceful guy who\u2019s just minding his own business.\u201d Schmidt \u201cknows this guy just got released from jail, was on methamphetamine, had a prior violent history, multiple felonies, domestic violence, armed robbery, et cetera.\u201d<\/p>\n

The prosecution\u2019s approach, Davis said, \u201cwas based on either false witness testimony or just papering over facts that weren\u2019t presented at trial and presenting a different narrative in their place.\u201d<\/p>\n

Ultimately, Davis said, Schmidt left the jury \u201cwithout the tools to determine that\u2026 (Epps) needed to use deadly force to protect himself against Marcus Polk.\u201d<\/p>\n

Davis added that the prosecutor\u2019s alleged misconduct and the judge\u2019s apparent failure to admonish the jury that Schmidt knowingly told them information he knew to be false or misleading, as well as the improper jury instruction, \u201cmake strong grounds for an appeal.\u201d<\/p>\n

In the trial\u2019s final phase, the prosecution will argue affirmatively for the remaining aggravation charge, for marijuana possession. The defense will present mitigating factors, likely including that the offense was non-violent, happened more than 20 years ago (prior to California voters legalizing cannabis), and Epps has since led a productive life. The defense will also present letters of support for Epps. If Epps\u2019 prior conviction is mitigated, a strike would be removed from his record \u2013 mooting the 25-year sentence enhancement on the gun possession charge.<\/p>\n

Immediately after this hearing, expected sometime in February 2026, the judge will pronounce the sentence, marking an auspicious moment in a nine-year legal process.<\/p>\n

With most of the aggravating factors off the table, there is a real chance Epps may not see any jail time.<\/p>\n

Among the possible outcomes: He could be sentenced to probation and not remanded into custody. He could also be handed a term of between three and 11 years. He could receive a sentence\u00a0and<\/em>\u00a0probation. He could also be credited for time served \u2013 in that instance, if his sentence is shorter than the four years he spent under house arrest with a GPS ankle monitor, he will be considered to have served his full term.<\/p>\n

This story was produced in partnership with California Black Media. Read ACoM\u2019s coverage of the Kevin Epps\u2019 trial\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ByEric Arnold Dec 30, 2025 Kevin...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78313","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ca-local","category-u-s-a"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78313","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=78313"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78313\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":78314,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78313\/revisions\/78314"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=78313"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=78313"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=78313"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}