Why did Boudin claim the killing of an elderly Asian grandfather wasn’t racially motivated because the suspect was having a “temper tantrum” before the attack?


This is a distortion of a statement Boudin gave describing the actions of the suspect BEFORE the attack and was not remotely excusing any of the defendant’s behavior. DA Boudin charged that defendant with murder and remains pending. Boudin has always taken this crime very seriously and charged the defendant based on the evidence presented by police.   Police did not present any evidence of motive in this case, and there was no evidence showing that the defendant even saw or knew the race of the victim during the attack, much less that he was motivated by race to commit the attack. See full context of his statement below:

In the hours before the attack, Mr. Watson had a string of setbacks. He left his home because of a family dispute and got in a traffic accident in San Francisco at 2 a.m. He was cited by the San Francisco police for running a stop sign and reckless driving and then slept that night in his car.

On that morning a number of security cameras in the area captured Mr. Watson banging a car with his hand, according to Mr. Boudin, the district attorney.

“It appears that the defendant was in some sort of a temper tantrum,” Mr. Boudin said.

It was then that Mr. Vicha walked up Anzavista Avenue, a street with views of skyscrapers in the city’s financial district. [New York Times, 2/27/21]