BY STEPHANIE LAM
Daily Post Correspondent
A Santa Clara County judge said yesterday she is considering removing District Attorney Jeff Rosen from retrying five pro-Palestinian activists on vandalism charges because he allegedly used the case for campaign fundraising.
Speaking to a San Jose courtroom, Judge Kelley Paul said she will decide on April 30 whether Rosen’s office will be recused from putting German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor-Black and Amy Zhai on trial again. The five all took part in breaking into the Stanford president’s office on June 5, 2024 to demand the university divest from companies aiding Israel’s military in Gaza.
Deadlocked jury
The trial to prosecute the five with felony vandalism and conspiracy charges began on Jan. 9 and ended on Feb. 13, with jurors divided 8-4 for guilt on the conspiracy and 9-3 for guilt on the vandalism.
Following the verdict, Rosen said he would push for a retrial. The protesters are accused of causing $300,000 in damage.
But in a Feb. 25 motion, Singh argued that Rosen used the prosecution to solicit campaign donations on his website, including posting the donation button on the same webpage he accused the five of “anti-Semitism.”
Singh also writes that Rosen published a YouTube video where he said he was going to “Fight for Israel” and described the five as “un-American.”
More time allowed
Judge Paul was expected to make the recusal decision yesterday, but instead ruled to allow the defense more time to obtain records and documents related to their case. Singh said the defense wants to get fundraising-related information, including Rosen’s donor list and finances from a December fundraiser.
The case will continue on Thursday, April 30 at 1:30 p.m.
[Comment deleted — Terms of Use violations]
This is proof that this particular prosecution was only political in nature. I just wish that D.A. Rosen could focus on something else – like public safety.
300k in damages seems rather escalated. I wonder who gave the estimate? I don’t think one would want to use their services . Did they get at least 2 estimates? Can someone disclose the final bill and why it was so high? Paint, some sheet rock, door replacement, some glass, and some cameras and running wire? Someone is bilking the system and the DA should be bright enough to question the damages. I’m not saying they are not guilty, I just question the bill.
I don’t think that this would constitute bribery since it was a campaign contribution. Still, this doesn’t seem like something that a district attorney should be engaged in. Another example would be altering time sheets. He should know better.
Someone should ask Rosen’s office about why Colombo was charged over a ridiculous false accusation. That whole farce cost the taxpayers of Palo Alto 3.25 million not to mention Colombo’s career and all because Rosen was playing politics with Michelle Dauber. Just look up Judge Persky if you want to know how scared Rosen was of this woman and her ME2 angry friends. Rosen’s office is very, very political and that is a fact.
Rosen’s office had the conviction for the murder of Sierra LaMar overturned. And the Dana Stubblefield conviction was overturned. He and they aren’t exactly batting 1.000.
[Comment removed — Terms of Use violation. If you have an opinion, go ahead and state it. But don’t claim you have information that isn’t verified.]
[Comment removed — several Terms of Use violations.]
The question in this case has nothing to do with Rosen. Did the defendants commit vandalism and/or conspire to commit vandalism by illegally entering and barring themselves in to the President’s office in order to get the University to divest its interest in companies doing business with Israel? Yes they did. If they get off the hook it will set a very bad precedent.