Stanford felony vandalism case ends in mistrial

It was not an acquittal, but for five activists facing potential felony convictions for a protest held on the Stanford University campus in 2024, a mistrial declared Friday by a Santa Clara County judge was seen as a victory.

Jurors split 8–4 in favor of guilt on conspiracy charges and 9–3 on felony vandalism charges, falling short of the unanimous verdict required for conviction of all five people. After polling jurors — who all said they did not believe that further deliberations could produce a verdict — Judge Hanley Chew declared a mistrial.

District Attorney Jeff Rosen said he would seek another trial.

“This case is about a group of people who destroyed someone else’s property and caused hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage,” Rosen said. “That is against the law and that is why we will retry the case.”

The mistrial comes a week after the jury first reported being hung on the conspiracy charges. Deliberations were further interrupted earlier this week when a juror became ill and Thursday’s court holiday delayed proceedings until Friday.

The case centered around five of the 13 people initially arrested in connection with damage to Stanford University’s executive offices during a June 2024 protest calling on the university to divest from companies linked to Israel, months after the country’s military response to the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks by Hamas drew withering criticism for suffering inflicted on the residents of the Gaza Strip.

Opening statements began in early January, and the trial concluded later the same month. The others initially arrested either accepted plea deals or were granted diversion programs.

Defendants German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor Black and Amy Zhai gathered outside the courtroom Friday to thank about a dozen supporters, many of whom have attended proceedings since the defendants’ initial appearances in April last year.

“It’s the district attorney failing to find us guilty, which is his job,” Gonzalez told this news organization. “His job is to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, and that did not happen.”

Santa Clara County Deputy Public Defender Avi Singh, who represented Gonzalez, said while he had hoped the DA would dismiss the case after the defeat, defense attorneys would be ready for a retrial.

“That is a decision they’ll have to make, and then we have to prepare the case for trial again,” Singh said.

During the trial, the prosecution sought to limit discussion of the war in Gaza, urging jurors to focus on the defendants’ actions rather than political motivations. Defense attorneys argued the protest was protected expression and said there was insufficient evidence the defendants intended to damage the buildings.

Prosecutors focused on showing that the demonstrators caused more than $300,000 in damage to Building 10, including breaking a window to gain entry. Security footage presented at trial showed the defendants covering cameras with materials and stacking furniture to block doors.

Defense attorneys countered with evidence that the protesters had planned to liaise with police and intended to leave the building voluntarily, arguing the demonstration was meant to be peaceful. They also showed video of law enforcement allegedly cursing at protesters.

Jurors did not disclose what issues divided them, and although the judge allowed further discussion of the deadlock after court was dismissed, the jurors did not stay to answer questions.

Supporters said the prosecution was an attempt to suppress dissent. Tori Porell, senior staff attorney at Palestine Legal, said the case “was an experiment in attempting to crush dissent with impunity” and reflected “changing times” as public support for the Palestinian people grows.

The Stanford case stands out from other campus protest cases nationwide.

Charges were eventually dismissed against demonstrators arrested during a 2024 protest at Columbia University. Felony cases involving protesters at the University of Michigan were later dropped. Following arrests at a Gaza encampment at UCLA, the Los Angeles city attorney declined to file criminal charges, though many students faced campus discipline.

For the Stanford defendants, the mistrial brings relief but also continued disruption.

Gonzalez, still a Stanford student studying urban studies, said ongoing court dates have interfered with his education and work.

“I can’t go to class this quarter. … I’m only able to go to class when there is no court and there’s always court,” he said. “I should be able to be working right now and supporting my family, but I can’t because of this.”

Zhai, who graduated last year, said she has not been able to return home to Maryland during the trial but is eager to go back soon.

“I wasn’t expecting to stay here for such a long time. I’m not from the Bay. I grew up in Maryland. … I’m excited,” she said. “If the DA doesn’t dismiss, I’m ready for a trial too. And I think that we’ll get a favorable opinion on that one as well.”