|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
John Richardson, who was one of 11 protesters who barricaded themselves in the Stanford University president’s office to protest the war in Gaza, testified this week that his group was motivated by the suffering in Palestine and that members made an effort to minimize and clean up the damage.
Over three days of questioning from defense and prosecution attorneys, Richardson said Stanford students did not persuade him to advocate for Palestine and that he had been protesting in the months prior at his respective university. He testified that he could not recall who invited him to break into the president’s office building in June 2024.
“I remember learning that there were no universities left in Gaza and how many teachers and people had died with them. That was particularly striking,” Richardson said in court, describing his motivations to protest.
The testimony came during the trial for five of the 11 individuals who broke into the building. Currently, German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Amy Jing Zhai and Hunter Taylor-Black are being charged with felony vandalism and conspiracy. Six other protesters, Cameron Michael Pennington, Kaiden Wang, Eliana Lindsay Fuchs, Gretchen Rose Giumarin, Isabella Terrazas, Zoe Georgia Edelman and Richardson took plea or alternative deals before the trial began.
During Richardson’s testimony, Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker, who is leading the prosecution, attempted to limit the defense’s mention of Gaza, genocide and “their beliefs of whats happening on the other side of the world,” he said.
“It was like every other word was ‘genocide’ or ‘murder,’” Baker said of the defense.
When the trial began in early January, Baker characterized the trial as a clear property damage case in which students intentionally caused harm to the university to seek political change.
“This was an attempted extortion,” he said previously.
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Hanley Chew allowed the defense to continue with limited questions on divestment, something defense attorneys said was integral to student motivation. Defense attorney Leah Gillis said that students believed that their actions could help save lives in Palestine by potentially persuading the university to divest from companies that supply military aid to Israel.
Stanford’s investment responsibility statement offers guidance on situations in which divestment is warranted, noting that some situations are so “abhorrent and ethically unjustifiable as to warrant the University’s dissociation from those investments.” This includes cases of “apartheid, genocide, human trafficking, slavery and violations of child labor laws.”
Richardson’s actions should be evaluated in the context of the broader protest movement, defense suggested.
“The problem we have is a district attorney that mocked [Richardson] repeatedly … treated him as if he was a child that was simply throwing a tantrum,” Gillis said.
Richardson testified that student protesters did not wish to make a “show” of their arrests and their plans to enter the office were not set in stone. There were options to bribe janitorial staff, prop open a window or lock arms outside of the building with student activists, some of whom were communicating with protesters inside the building, according to Richardson.
While the District Attorney’s Office did not explicitly offer a more lenient sentence in exchange for Richardson’s interview, he believed that not meeting with prosecutors and a police investigator could negatively impact his sentencing, Richardson said.
The group of 11 allegedly entered the president’s office in 2024 by breaking one window and opening a door to let remaining people inside. Once inside, protesters stacked furniture to barricade doors, hung up a banner, spilled fake blood made from corn syrup and covered cameras with tissues. Before police entered the building, protesters made an effort to clean up the building and complied with arrests.
The university originally estimated $700,000 in repairs, but a more detailed investigation concluded that $300,000 in damage could be attributed to the protesters, Baker wrote in court documents. Stanford University suspended students for two quarters, required community service hours and is demanding $300,000 plus restitution from the group.
The five protesters on trial could still face prison time, which defense attorneys argued is extreme.
“This is not a criminal enterprise, this is their effort to send a message,” said defense attorney Tony Brass in his opening statement.
The trial will resume on Monday, when Deputy District Attorney Baker is scheduled to call two more witnesses to the stand.
