Felony conspiracy and vandalism charges against five pro-Palestinian Stanford University protesters will be dismissed under a pretrial diversion agreement reached Monday with the state Attorney General’s Office.
A jury in the case deadlocked in February before the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office was recused for a conflict of interest. A judge ruled that District Attorney Jeff Rosen’s use of the case in a campaign fundraising materials that referred to the protest as “antisemitic” and other communications represented a conflict.
The case stemmed from a protest in June 2024 during which an administration building was occupied and damaged. The charges, which also included misdemeanor trespassing, represented some of the most serious criminal accusations to be brought after thousands of arrests were recorded around the country in 2023 and 2024 during student protests against financial support for Israel’s activities in Gaza.
The California Attorney General’s Office took over the case and was deciding whether to retry the felonies, prior to the diversion agreement reached Monday. The agreement means all 12 of the protesters will avoid criminal charges if they complete the terms of pretrial agreements, after seven others already reached deals to avoid conviction.
The defendants will have the charges dismissed if they complete 100 hours of community service. They were also ordered to pay nearly $52,000 in restitution, which a spokesperson for the defendants said had been paid.
Amy Zhai, one of the defendants, said in a phone interview that she felt relieved to have the matter resolved after the agreement was reached to dismiss the charges.
“Any way you look at it, it’s a victory,” she said.
She said that the trial and criminal charges had effectively disrupted her and her other defendants’ lives. But she said the experience did not diminish the group’s support for the Palestinian people, who the United Nations says face daily killings by Israel’s military, has had nearly its entire population displaced, and continues to face a humanitarian crisis of food, sanitation, and medical needs brought on by the military onslaught that has been supported by the United States.
Zhai said she hoped the case would invigorate the movement and lead more people to speak up for the people of Gaza.
“If this was an attempt to silence speech that supports Palestine, that failed,” she said.
The Attorney General’s Office said in a statement that the resolution would bring accountability for the damage caused during the demonstration, during which the protesters demanded the university divest itself from investments funding war crimes in Palestine.
“This resolution requires the defendants to make amends to the community for their actions through extensive community service and ensures they fully reimburse Stanford for all repairs,” a representative of the Attorney General’s Office said in an email.
Two of the defendants have completed their community service, according to the nonprofit organization Council on Islamic-American Relations – San Francisco Bay Area, or CAIR-SFBA. The advocacy organization objected to the charges being brought by the DA’s Office and said they were motivated by the students’ pro-Palestinian stance.
“These students should never have faced felony charges for their participation in a campus protest,” CAIR-SFBA said in a statement.
“Treating protest activity as felony conduct was disproportionate from the outset, and putting them through another trial after more than two years, a mistrial and the disqualification of the District Attorney’s Office because of a conflict of interest would only have compounded that harm,” the organization said.
Protests were held at several prominent universities besides Stanford, including the UC-Berkeley, UCLA and Columbia University. The Stanford protesters broke into an administrative office and occupied it, causing what the university said was thousands of dollars in damage.
The students were calling on the university to divest its endowment from investments tied to Israel’s government and military, according to the students involved.
A representative of the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office declined to comment and referred questions to the Attorney General’s Office.
The five defendants are: German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Amy Jing Zhai and Hunter Taylor-Black.
Justice is not always fair nor swift. The defendants will have to complete 100 hours of community service and pay over $50,000 in restitution. Sounds like they did something wrong. Where did the $52,000 payment come from? Did CAIR pay the restitution?
It’s interesting that our very own PADP published a comment from CAIR but not Stanford or any other organizando – seems like fair and impartial reporting. Right?
Mariam says, “It’s interesting that our very own PADP published a comment from CAIR but not Stanford or any other organizando – seems like fair and impartial reporting. Right?”
But Stanford hasn’t made a statement about the plea bargain. So what is our PADP supposed to do? Make something up?
Restitution for $300,000 to $1 million in damages is $52,000? Rob Bonta rides to the rescue again. This deal won’t deter anybody from doing this again.
Umm, the amount Stanford claimed was grossly exaggerated. The prosecution was able to attribute only carpet cleaning, damage to door handle, one broken window, and expert examination of an antique clock that had some red corn syrup drips on it to this particular incident. So def not 300K claimed. The restitution amount was in line with the receipts submitted (if anything, it was very generous). So if anything, this is a message that an institution like Stanford can’t make claims about damage without an actual proof of damage coming from this incident.
You left out a few things Saki. I was there after the police arrested the protesters.
1. The protesters broke a window to enter, damaged door frames, smashed furniture, and disabled a security camera.
2. They splashed and smeared fake blood/red paint on office walls, personal property of employees, photos on the president’s desk, and a life-sized cardboard cutout of the president bearing the word “SHAME”.
3. They used ladders, office furniture, and other items to block doorways and barricade themselves inside.
4. They spray painted phrases like “Our Office Now”
“Death to Israehell” (or “death 2 Israhell”)
“Pigs Taste Best Dead”
“Kill Cops”
“Death 2 US”
“F— AmeriKKKa” (or “F@#& America” with KKK imagery)
“Burn this s@#& down”
“F@#& Israel kill Israel”
5. The vandalism defaced several historic sandstone walls and pillars. Removing it cost tens of thousands of dollars.
I can see how this may have looked to someone who entered the area after the fact so I want to share what was actually presented in court:
1/ yes, they broke a window. The door handle was only bent because a ladder was tied to it (not because someone violently smashed) and the damage was relatively small (a bent bar). They put napkins over security cameras so there was no damage to the security system. They actually did not smash the furniture — furniture was simply moved to make the barricade. Some furniture damage occurred when the police pushed it to remove the barricade and enter.
1/ There was no fake blood splattered on the walls inside (fake blood being corn syrup mixed with food coloring). There was some on the desk and on papers, as well as what dropped on the carpet. There were a few drops on an antique clock. Obviously, this needed a clean up but it’s something that Stanford did in-house, with the exception of the clock that went for a professional assessment. The assessment—which found no structural damage— was over 10k in itself (an example of what inflated costs)
3/ yes, that’s accurate
4/ the graphitti you refer to — which everyone agrees are despicable — were not sprayed by the 12 who were arrested. The surveillance footage show that the graphitti occurred AFTER the 12 entered the Presidents office and barricaded themselves in. So someone else — likely other protesters — were culpable. I know that you want to see justice for what’s clearly hate speech but the 12 arrested were not responsible for the graphitti. In fact, their communication showed that they tried to minimize any damage and ask other protesters to do same (clearly someone still did it). That’s the reason the graphitti were not even part of the prosecution’s case.
5/ Again, it is clear that there was damage on the walls from the graphitti. But there were hundreds of protesters outside while the 12 were in the building. So that damage could not be attributed to the 12 on trial.
Anyway, just wanted to provide what evidence was presented (publicly) in the courtroom and why this case was not so black and white. You can access this same info through court records.
I guess they’ll say anything to minimize the damage. At least she didn’t try this one, “The police did all the damage by breaking in to arrest us.”
You can’t get a small bathroom remodeled for $52,000 in Palo Alto. If you don’t believe me get some estimates.
How do you know that the stark differences in how the case was handled were not a result of using a prosecution for fundraising?
Wonder how much money mommy and daddy had to donate to AG Bonts’s next campaign?
The lead defendant is a son of agricultural workers from Watsonville — so $0?
German Rafael Gonzalez, whose parents work at a winery, is always trotted out there to suggest the other defendants have working class bona fides like him. But the information about the parents of the other defendants is kept under wraps. I wonder why that would be? Would it blow the narrative that these students come from working class families?
We do know that Zoe Georgia Edelman, one of those arrested, is the granddaughter of Hillary Clinton’s mentor, Marian Wright Edelman. Marion Wright Edelman is the founder of the Children’s Defense Fund, a liberal organization. Hillary Clinton has called Marion Wright Edelman “my hero and mentor.”
Funny how that information isn’t being discussed by people like Aria.
The leadership of these nonprofits has a revolving door. Zoe Georgia Edelman’s parents are Josh Edelman and Heather Edelman. Josh Edelman is a former K-12 deputy director at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and chief network officer at Transcend.
Makes me wonder about the other defendants and their family fortunes.
You are quoting here family lineage of one of the protestors but she was not on the trial. If the focus of previous comment is how much parents of the five defendants paid to get this sentence, the objective response is that that there is no evidence that their parents paid anything. As mentioned, Mr. Gonzales’ parents work in farm country/fields and would simply not be able afford it even if we lived in a corrupt judicial system (which I don’t think we do). People can ofc make unfounded accusations or spread conspiracy theories…
Aria, you didn’t explain why the family wealth of the other protesters is hidden. You try to cite Gonzalez as an example, but he might be a one off. Those of us who live in Palo Alto see the wealth of Stanford students all the time. Driving away in their new Teslas, they don’t seem to be the type who grew up in a hardscrabble neighborhood wherre their parents had to scrimp and save and work two jobs just to put their kid through school. Prove me wrong.
They’re not going to tell you about the wealthy upbringing of the other protesters. They want you to think that these hard-working young people woke up one morning and realized the injustice taking place and decided to take action. The truth is that these kids enjoy lives of privilege in some of the nation’s wealthiest households. So they’re never going to reveal anything about these protesters. Due to inherited wealth, none of them will ever need real jobs. But if they were to apply somewhere, you can be assured that their names have been added to the “Do No Interview” list many HR directors check.
I am from Vancouver,Canada and i am glad that the Charges against the 5 Pro -Palestinian Students are dropped. They shouldn`t have been charged in the first place. I hope they get lots of support.
Nobody likes Canadians… especially when they’re named Stan.
Some protesters, such as this Macklemore character, say Free Palestine, not Free Gaza. “Free Palestine” is actually advocating for Hamas, which has the view that the state of Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian lands and must be eliminated. “Free Gaza” would be more in line with a two-state solution, which Hamas opposes.
The fake Catholic Bonta proves once again that he has no spine. If these were pro Christian or pro Jewish protestors the book would have been thrown at them. He must have been contacted by his overlords to soften the charges……
The law is the law, when the law is not enforced, it is useless.
Tip to the Hamas protesters: Next time, send your donations into the DA’s office early. Once he sees the checks, he won’t bring any charges. He even has a rate sheet that shows the crime in one column and how much you’ve got to donate in the next column. But you waited too long and the case went to Bonta, who charges considerably more.
That’s exactly how it works. Violent thugs and rapists can do the same.
“during student protests against financial support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza.” as if this is a true fact and not a false claim of this movement that doesn’t really care about the Palestinians.
I’m no fan of Rosen’s but he wasn’t the problem here. The protesters who held out and avoided a plea deal got a terrific break as one of them admitted when a couple of nitwit jurors declined to convict them of a felony. So the decision was passed on to Bonta and everyone knows the rest of the story. Total bummer.
Rosen has always been the problem. A D.A. should never personally benefit from a prosecution. Until you become the target, it’s hard to see it.
Stanford, because of its “progressive” hiring and admissions policies, has become a big playpen for all sorts of abuse. If we only look at very recent examples we have Ms. Julie who felt perfectly free to have an affair with a female undergraduate she was responsible for in her role as a counselor and dean. Palo Alto rewarded her by electing her to the City Council. Then the so-called Stanford Five got away with trashing the president’s office as part of pursuing their own personal political agenda. Then graduation this year was marred by a student walkout where some graduates chose to listen to some guy named Mahmood over the CEO of Google, a company that actually has some high-paying jobs that some graduates might be interested in.