Jurors hear closing arguments in Stanford protester trial

"A prosecutor Thursday (Jan. 29) told jurors they should convict five demonstrators for conspiring to break into the Stanford president's office on June 5, 2024, causing $300,000 in damage. Meanwhile, a defense attorney asserted that the protesters never intended to cause harm and only wanted to raise awareness about their demands for Stanford to sell its stock in companies that supply the Israeli military. None of the five protesters on trial testified on their own behalf."

"Baker said protesters intentionally took the building to use as leverage for Stanford to comply with their divestment demands. Witness John Richardson, a protester who was arrested on June 5 and sided with the prosecution to potentially have his charges dropped, said he was a part of a group chat that planned the office occupation along with the five Stanford students on trial - German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor-Black and Amy Zhai."

"Protesters had splattered fake blood and broke windows, doors and furniture. The damage was put 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. Singh said the door barricades set up by the protesters during the occupation were meant to minimize risks of violence and harm."

Prosecutors urged jurors to convict five demonstrators for conspiring to break into the Stanford president's office on June 5, 2024, asserting the occupation caused more than $300,000 in damage. The prosecutor said protesters planned the occupation weeks earlier, used the building as leverage to force Stanford to divest from companies supplying the Israeli military, and intentionally damaged property, including splattering fake blood and breaking windows, doors and furniture. A witness, arrested protester John Richardson, testified he participated in a group chat that planned the occupation and delegated tasks. Defense counsel argued the occupation was peaceful, intended to raise awareness, and door barricades were meant to minimize harm.

Read at Padailypost