BY STEPHANIE LAM
Daily Post Correspondent
Defense attorneys told a jury Friday that the Stanford protesters who broke into the president’s office on June 5, 2024 did not intend for the demonstration to be violent, and questioned the reliability of a protester John Richardson, who is helping the prosecution.
Avi Singh, an attorney for German Gonzalez, cross-examined Richardson, 21, of Menlo Park, about his correspondence with the five Stanford students on trial – Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor-Black and Amy Zhai – prior to the June 5 event. Singh said the protesters were only focused on bringing attention to their pleas to get Stanford to divest itself from companies that provide military equipment to Israel.
The group laid out in a group chat beforehand how they would get into the office on June 5, but didn’t plan for how long to be there, Singh said.
When asked by Singh, Richardson said protesters were concerned for the university’s janitorial staff, and wanted to “minimize the mess,” which included splattering fake blood across the office.
Richardson also said getting Stanford to divest was a “shared principle by everyone” who was in the office on June 5, 2024.
Protesters had been urging Stanford to divest from defense companies tied to the Israel Defense Forces, such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.
Last week Richardson said he was a part of a signal group chat called “Bingo Party” that consisted of several protesters, including the five on trial.
Richardson said the group messaged each other about how to occupy the building. There were discussions about who would go through a window of the office and open doors and barricade themselves inside.
Singh also pointed out that Richardson’s involvement on June 5 and what he saw other protesters do, is not completely reliable. When asked, Richardson said he couldn’t recall or name which tools were used to break into the building, or exactly where the five protesters were.
“Not everything was planned to a T,” Richardson said.
Singh also brought up how Richardson was taking a deal with the District Attorney and might have a bias for supporting Deputy DA Rob Baker’s arguments.
Richardson, who is not a Stanford student, took part in the June 5 occupation and was arrested along with a dozen other protesters. Richardson sided with the prosecution in an effort to potentially get his vandalism and conspiracy charges dropped.
In opening statements, Baker argued that there was a criminal intent for the office takeover on June 5, telling jurors that the five on trial intensified the protest by occupying the university president’s office and using the building “as leverage” for their demands.
Jan. 10, 2026 — Stanford students go on trial
Nov. 24, 2025 — Three Stanford protesters plan to take plea deals
July 18, 2025 — Stanford protesters go to court, along with supporters
April 10, 2025 — DA charges Stanford protesters with felonies
Jan. 9, 2025 — Fate of students arrested in Stanford protest is in limbo seven months later
June 10, 2024 — Protesters arrested at Stanford identified
If you break the law, there are consequences.
Why is the government pursuing criminal charges when J6ers are free?
This DAs Office just pursues media attention instead of focusing on real crimes. Just look at the latest Reservoir Dogs style photo on their online platform of prosecutors “investigating” the latest officer involved shooting. Great photo op but otherwise a nothing burger. Stanford has an endowment of several billion dollars. They got some furniture broken. The students will have disciplinary consequences. Move the F on already.
If this break-in and occupation goes unpunished why wouldn’t some other group with a gripe do the same thing? The Stanford trustees are responsible for investing the endowment so it produces maximum return for the entire university community. If you let students for political reasons cherry-pick what the trustees can invest in and what they can’t you’d be setting a terrible precedent. Other groups could jump in to ban other things and stage similar occupations.