BY STEPHANIE LAM
Daily Post Correspondent
Jurors are deadlocked over whether to convict five pro-Palestinian demonstrators for conspiring to break into the Stanford president’s office on June 5, 2024.
The jurors will resume their deliberations today after sending a note to Judge Hanley Chew on Thursday saying they were split 8-4 on a conspiracy charge. It is unknown which way the jury is leaning. The jury has been deliberating since Feb. 2.
Chew is presiding over the trial of five Stanford students — German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor-Black and Amy Zhai — who are facing felony charges of vandalism and conspiracy.
If convicted, the group could face $329,000 in restitution and a maximum sentence of more than three years in prison.
Another trial possible
But a prolonged deadlock on the conspiracy or vandalism charges, or both, could potentially result in a total or partial mistrial. That could result in a second trial.
Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker and defense attorneys wrapped up closing arguments for the case on Jan 30.
Earlier, Baker said jurors should convict the five because they intentionally planned to take over the offices on June 5, 2024, to use as leverage for Stanford to comply with their divestment demands.
Protesters had been urging Stanford at the time to divest from defense companies that sell products to the Israel Defense Forces, such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.
Fake blood, broken windows
Protesters had splattered fake blood and broke windows, doors and furniture on June 5, putting the damage at more than $300,000.
But defense attorney Avi Singh, who represents Gonzalez, insists the occupation was peaceful and only meant to raise awareness about the students’ desire to have Stanford sell its stock in companies that do business with Israel.
The trial took nearly three weeks.
The witnesses included university patrol officer Jason Barnes, who was present during the arrest and booking of the protesters; John Richardson, a protester who was also arrested on June 5 and is working with the prosecution; and Stanford facilities director Mitch Bousson, who talked about the office damage.
They already deliberated for several days. Why are they being asked to keep deliberating? I thought dissent was American….
Is it ironic that District Attorney Rosen who pressed these unprecedented felony charges took his wife and adult daughter to Israel in the middle of the globally broadcast genocide these students were protesting specifically to visit Israeli military bases and provide “moral support” for the soldiers committing this heinous crime. Not only did Rosen, who we have entrusted to enforce our laws and protect our community, show complete disregard for international law and human decency, but he tacitly endorsed the greatest act of vandalism in recent history in the razing of nearly every home, business and public building in Gaza. And then he charges students protesting these atrocities with vandalism for damage caused my law enforcement breaking into the Stanford offices.
You Stink
This trial seems like a waste of time. Jeff Rosen tied up a courtroom for three weeks when he could have used it for rape and other violent crimes.
These students should have known better and should face the consequences. Their guilt is not in question.
How can Gohill claim he was acting as a journalist if he was wearing a mask like the others arrested in the president’s office?
Are they teaching journalism at Stanford, or activism?