Jurors in Stanford's High-Profile Protest Case Remain Deadlocked.
A possible mistrial looms over the trial of five Stanford students accused of felony vandalism during a 2024 protest. The group, which also includes a pro-Palestinian activist, is facing serious charges for their actions, which left more than $300,000 in damages to one of the university's buildings.
As the jury remains deadlocked on both conspiracy and vandalism charges, prosecutors and defense attorneys have returned to court to discuss the status. With jurors split 8-4 on the conspiracy charge, it is unclear whether they are favoring conviction or acquittal for all defendants.
One point of contention in the trial has been the extent to which the protesters' actions were premeditated. Prosecutors have argued that the group was highly organized and planned their action in advance, staying inside the building as leverage to push the university on divestment from Israel-linked companies.
In contrast, defense attorneys have framed the case as protected expression, arguing that the students wore protective gear and barricaded offices not to cause damage, but out of fear for their safety. They claim that a voice heard saying "Don't get arrested, b****" in a video footage came from a law enforcement officer, which they say undermines the prosecution's claims.
The trial has been marked by disagreements over how to evaluate the defendants' actions in terms of free speech and political expression. Prosecutors have urged jurors to set aside politics, while defense attorneys argue that their clients are being unfairly targeted due to their activism.
If the jury fails to reach a verdict on either charge, it could result in a total or partial mistrial, leaving the prosecution free to retry the case. The trial stands out from other campus protests nationwide, where similar charges have largely been dropped.
For now, the jury remains deadlocked, and the fate of the five Stanford students hangs in the balance.
A possible mistrial looms over the trial of five Stanford students accused of felony vandalism during a 2024 protest. The group, which also includes a pro-Palestinian activist, is facing serious charges for their actions, which left more than $300,000 in damages to one of the university's buildings.
As the jury remains deadlocked on both conspiracy and vandalism charges, prosecutors and defense attorneys have returned to court to discuss the status. With jurors split 8-4 on the conspiracy charge, it is unclear whether they are favoring conviction or acquittal for all defendants.
One point of contention in the trial has been the extent to which the protesters' actions were premeditated. Prosecutors have argued that the group was highly organized and planned their action in advance, staying inside the building as leverage to push the university on divestment from Israel-linked companies.
In contrast, defense attorneys have framed the case as protected expression, arguing that the students wore protective gear and barricaded offices not to cause damage, but out of fear for their safety. They claim that a voice heard saying "Don't get arrested, b****" in a video footage came from a law enforcement officer, which they say undermines the prosecution's claims.
The trial has been marked by disagreements over how to evaluate the defendants' actions in terms of free speech and political expression. Prosecutors have urged jurors to set aside politics, while defense attorneys argue that their clients are being unfairly targeted due to their activism.
If the jury fails to reach a verdict on either charge, it could result in a total or partial mistrial, leaving the prosecution free to retry the case. The trial stands out from other campus protests nationwide, where similar charges have largely been dropped.
For now, the jury remains deadlocked, and the fate of the five Stanford students hangs in the balance.
... I mean, can't we all just talk about these issues without getting charged for it? 
It's like, they're not even trying to hide their politics anymore and still expect to be treated unfairly. 
The "Don't get arrested, b****" thing is wild too - who do they think that came from, the police chief's wife? 
Like, more than $300k is a lot of money! 
And can we please talk about the free speech aspect? It's like, are we really going to punish people for speaking out against something? 
It's crazy how the trial is going on for ages and still can't make a decision. I think it's unfair that they're being charged with felony vandalism - didn't they have the right to express themselves? 
I wish the prosecution would focus more on what's really at stake here - free speech and the right to protest. 
. And the voice on the video footage is weird, if you ask me... It's hard to know what really happened without hearing from both sides. Can't we just let people express themselves without being charged for it? 
.
! It's crazy to think about how much controversy surrounding free speech and activism has sparked in this case 
. And at the same time, it's clear that there are some pretty harsh charges being thrown around, and some of the students' actions did cause significant damage 
. And I'm so grateful that these students are willing to take that risk and put themselves out there 
.
it sounds like they're just using that as an excuse to pin stuff on these kids 
. it's hard to deny that some of the protest tactics were pretty destructive, but at the same time, those guys were wearing protective gear and barricading offices for their own safety 
.
. if it really did come from an officer, then that's even more proof that they were trying to intimidate the protesters rather than just enforcing the law 
.
. I'm all for holding people accountable, but if it's not premeditated, then shouldn't that count? 
#JusticeForStanfordStudents. Can we please just wait for a fair verdict instead of risking a mistrial? 
... it's pretty clear they weren't exactly innocent bystanders. And now we're stuck with this deadlocked jury because the defense is trying to spin their actions as some kind of "protected expression" 
. It's like, they're trying to make an example out of these kids just because they spoke up about something that matters to them. The fact that a voice from a law enforcement officer could be misinterpreted is crazy 
. But at the same time, if the protesters were really planning to cause damage and not just trying to make a point, then they should've thought that through before going ahead with it 
.
. Can we just acknowledge that free speech and activism are important components of our society without having to weigh them against "the law"?
. I hope the jury can see the bigger picture and give them a fair shot 
. but honestly, if they don't reach a verdict soon, it's gonna be a total mess 