With masks and clothes of clothing in the hope of changing their appearance before escaping, a dozen pro-Palestinian activists broke a window in the building housing the president’s office at the University of Stanford last June, so that one of them can crawl and open doors for the rest.
They had spent weeks if not more planning of the attack on encrypted cats and drew their tactics from an online manual which encouraged them to develop a “certain spirit” with regard to the protest, say the prosecutors.
Thursday, these 12, all the current or former students of Stanford except one, were accused of two crimes each.
This is the first large -scale load of student demonstrators in California, bearing the most serious sanctions possible, leveled by Santa Clara County Dist. Atty. Jeff Rosen.
Dist of the County of Santa Clara. Atty. Jeff Rosen, center, announces accusations of crime against 12 pro-Palestinian demonstrators who, in June, would have burst into and vandalized a building from the administration of the University of Stanford, barricading itself before being arrested the same day.
(Suzanne Rust / Suzanne Rust / Los Angeles Times)
You can see how quickly it will transform into loaded political fodder – a Jewish district prosecutor depositing accusations against pro -Palestinian children. Trump is sure to approve.
But here is the difficult part. Me too.
If we transform these charges into politics without worrying about looking at the details and nuances, we fall into a Trump trap, claiming a side based on emotion and partisanary rather than on the law.
Justice is supposed to be blind (even if it often takes an eye), but in this case, we need it to be deaf to the reasons why these students took their measures. Not different from people (now forgiven) of January 6 who burst into the capital of our country and ransacked the articulation, these students went too far.
But the government’s response with regard to Israel and Gaza, anti -Semitism and freedom of expression.
“There is a political game that is played here,” said Brian Levin, professor emeritus at Cal State San Bernardino and Extemism Expert. “There are dishonest people who confuse passionate and sincere political protest to save the lives of Palestinian children, with those who are out of limits and use undeniable symbols linked to foreign terrorist groups or abject anti -Semitism and severe crime.
But, of course, there is no desire to separate the peaceful demonstrators from others at the moment.
Let us be real – Our country is on the verge of anarchy, mainly due to the claims of the president according to which his powers exceed those of the courts. Pro-Palestinian activists are gathered and have disappeared in an opaque expulsion system, even leaving American citizens fearing to express themselves (all those accused in the Stanford case are American citizens).
At the same time, universities see their federal funds withdrawn from not protecting Jewish students – which is also true.
Hatred crimes soaring during and after the pandemic, but began to fall into California in 2023. But not those against the Jewish people, Muslims or those of Arab origin.
The California Public Policy Institute stressed that “anti-Jewish and anti-arab / Muslims hate crimes have more than doubled between 2020 and 2023″ ” Anti-Jewish crimes increased by 56%. Haine crimes motivated by anti-arab or anti-muslim feeling increased by 35%.
In 2024, Levin research found that anti-Jewish crimes had increased by 12% and anti-Muslim crime by 18%. So it’s not something in the past. A few weeks ago recently, Elon Musk, the South African billionaire who certainly did not mean a Nazi salute during an inauguration event, said that the Jewish billionaire George Soros was helping to agitate against the Musk automotive company, Tesla.
There is a clear attempt at the administration to use its fight against anti-Semitism as a just weapon and to paint all the pro-Palestinian feeling as a pro-Hamas. But below these waves is a deep ocean of hidden intention, in which the power to repress dissent on a subject if the government succeeds in breaking freedom of expression on this subject.
What cannot we talk about then? Right to vote?
If we make a message from Rosen’s decision to charge these people from crimes, it should that the application of laws reasonably protect freedom of expression and protect us from these political games.
I spoke to him on Thursday before announcing the accusations and asked him what had made this decision, as a Jewish man and as an elected prosecutor.
“I am a Jew, just as people go, you know, to question this decision because of this,” he recognized. “And I think everyone has prejudices. I do, everyone does it. And I think the best we can hope for in our elected officials is that they recognize prejudices, that they put them aside and do their duty. And that’s what I do every day.”
He “tries to play this in the middle” and “does the right thing”.
Rosen did not charge for hatred crimes and said that there was simply not enough evidence, in his mind, to show that what motivated these students was the animus of the Jewish people rather than anger at the actions of Israel.
He invoices them for vandalism, he said, due to the extent of the damage they caused in about hours, they were in the building-broken doors, a false blood thrown away, burglared offices, ruined personal elements. In total, the university estimates that it was $ 250,000 in destruction, far beyond the threshold of a crime.
Then there is the intrusion plot and all the foresight that would have entered this area. They had code names, covered with surveillance cameras and attempted to erase cats from their phones, according to the prosecutors.
The manual “How to occupy” is extremely detailed, explaining how to eliminate imperfections with a doe foot, the value of battery electric tools on their plug-in counterparts, the possibility that vandalism is a good result if the occupants are expelled. Students, being stanford -type replacements, seem to have studied and closely followed by the guide, according to load documents – wrap the building in a few days before. So conspiracy, if the jury agrees.
But still, Rosen knows that he is dealing with students (aged 18 to 32 when the incident occurred) who acted with as much passion as premeditation. He is not there to ruin lives or to cool freedom of expression.
“It will seem biblical,” he told me. “But they caused all this damage, right?” They vandalized. They did all these damage. I would therefore like their punishment to clean things. ”
(The lawyer for one of these accused told Times that his client understood that there would be consequences, but stressed that his client and others had suspensions of several months, costing their accommodation, their health insurance and their courses – and putting their academic future in the limbo.)
Although the maximum sentence can be more than three years in prison, Rosen said that he would like to see a kind of diversion – perhaps taking garbage on the side of the road.
“I am not trying to send them to prison. I think what I would like to see here is that they are guilty, they accept responsibility,” he said. “The individuals here, they did not engage in a debate. They just committed these criminal acts. And it is impulsive, and they are wrapped with the merit of their cause, and so everyone. And I try to be reflected and of model the types of behavior that we want to have here.”
As these charges are debated, we can all be so thoughtful. Protest is a crucial element of democracy, both a power and a right.
Break the locks with a doe foot? As Levin told me, we should look at him with “a strong dose of mercy”.
Then apply the law, blind and deaf – in particular to politics.
California Daily Newspapers
