San Francisco ‘trans’ slaying case descends into farce after defense sends private eye to interrogate religious juror at his own home
A federal murder case descended into farce today after it emerged that a juror accused another of being unfair to the defendant during deliberations, which prompted defense attorneys to use a private eye to track that man down and interrogate him about what had gone on in the jury room.
U.S. District Judge Susan Illston today rejected demands for a new trial by attorneys for Leion Butler – the transgender prostitute awaiting sentencing after being found guilty of voluntary manslaughter for shooting his client in the head at San Francisco’s Crissy Field in November 2023.
Illston was told that, after the verdict had been read in March 2025, a male juror, in the midst of a “panic attack”, complained that another juror made “biased comments” about the defendant being transgender during deliberations.
This “visibly distressed” juror also criticized the jury foreman.
The situation was made more bizarre after it transpired that the judge’s own courtroom deputy had become embroiled in the affair – accompanying the juror to a meeting with defense attorneys in the courthouse cafeteria at which he voiced his concerns over the verdict he had just agreed to.
The juror – Juror No. 11 – claimed that another juror had said, in the context of Butler’s claim that he killed Hamza Walupupu due to fearing a sexual assault, that “you can’t rape a man”. Juror No. 11 also claimed that this juror led a discussion on the length of sentence the defendant might receive.
Butler, a biological male who boasted of his penis when advertising his escort services, was referred to as a woman throughout the course of the seven day trial.
The juror referred to – Juror No. 10 – had told the court during jury selection that he was religious and took the view that there were two sexes.
After the verdict defense attorney David Risk tasked a private investigator, Keith McArthur, to locate the impugned juror. The pair, the court was told, then turned up on the man’s doorstep and demanded answers to their questions about what he had said during jury deliberations.
That juror, the court was told, said that he was far from alone in raising the issue about whether a man might be raped. It was, he said, raised by a lot of people during deliberations.
The defense appeared to be attempting to ‘bank’ the jury’s acquittal on second degree murder – which cannot be set aside under any circumstances – while attacking its guilty verdict on voluntary manslaughter, which can be reviewed in some instances, so as to let them ‘roll the dice’ again at a new trial, solely on a manslaughter charge, with no additional risk for their client.
“We think the motion should be granted, firstly, because this is an egregious, frankly, very severe case of juror bias,” said Rizk today in courtroom one of San Francisco federal courthouse.
“ ‘A man can’t be raped’ – that is a clear statement from a juror that Ms Butler should not receive the benefit of a full legal defense because of her gender.”
Prosecutors said that regardless of whether the remark was made or not, no juror could be questioned about it because of strict court rules protecting the confidentiallity of their discussions.
“In order to see what kind of impact this stray remark had on the jury, the court would need to call all twelve jurors to the stand and have them testify under oath about whether and to what extent that remark impacted their decision,” wrote assistant U.S. attorney Kelsey Davidson in a motion.
“This testimony would take place now, months after their deliberations and months after they’ve presumably discussed the case with friends and family and read news articles about the trial and Butler’s criminal history.”
“After the lengthy exchange where Juror 10 openly explained his views on transgender individuals, the defense elected not to challenge him for cause or peremptorily.”
Judge Illston – who indicated at the outset of proceedings that she was inclined to reject motions for a new trial or a full evidentiary hearing – remained unimpressed after hearing arguments from both sides.
“When juror number 10 made the comment at issue, no other jurors agreed,” the judge said, “and, further, the jury acquitted [Butler] of second degree murder…undercutting the claim that bias was a fact in the jury’s consideration.”
In a separate development, weeks earlier, Judge Illston postponed Butler’s sentencing for a second time, to October 31, after defense attorneys said they needed more time to develop community housing and support service provision for their client in the event a non-custodial sentence was imposed.
It transpired that officials had not yet been able to speak with Butler as part of their preparation of a presentence report – attempts to meet with him at San Francisco jail having twice failed.
“We view this as a problem of the defence’s own making,” said assistant U.S. attorney Kelsey Davidson at a hearing on August 1.
“Ms Butler was convicted on March 31,” she added. “They had April, May and June to schedule this interview and they didn’t.”
“The victim’s family really want to see this finished.”
“I hear your pain,” Illston replied, “but we nevertheless have the crunch that we have.”
Illston postponed sentencing in May after defense attorneys asked for time for Butler to take a violence prevention program and to continue to receive “evidence-based, gender-responsive, trauma-informed services for transgender women” in San Francisco County Jail.
Please support our work by using this Paypal link
To be notified of new stories enter your email address here or follow us on X
