How much will views on Israel influence high-profile Bay Area felony vandalism trial?

Jury selection in a Stanford felony vandalism case grew tense Monday as prosecutors and defense attorneys sparred over whether prospective jurors could be questioned about their views on Israel and Palestine in front of the full panel, highlighting how divisive views on the war in Gaza have complicated a routine judicial process.

The case centers on five of the 13 students initially arrested and accused of damaging Stanford’s executive offices during a June 2024 protest urging the university to divest from Israel-linked companies. Most of the others accepted plea deals or were granted court diversion programs. Unlike other arrests at pro-Palestine demonstrations, these defendants face potential felony convictions of up to three years in jail, making it one of the most serious cases against pro-Palestine activists in the country.

The five defendants who still face charges are German Gonzalez, Maya Burke, Taylor McCann, Hunter Taylor Black, and Amy Zhai.

The Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office argued that discussing jurors’ views on Israel and Palestine publicly could “poison” the jury pool. Defense attorney Leah Gillis countered that sequestering jurors would chill candid discussion and signal that open conversations about bias are not tolerated, undermining the goal of an impartial jury.

Judge Hanley Chew sided with the prosecution, allowing “limited individual” questioning of potential jurors outside the full panel, focusing solely on their views about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Chew said the measure was justified because discussion of the politically charged issue could “taint” the rest of the jury, though he emphasized he did not believe the defense sought to “indoctrinate” them.

According to a filing by the District Attorney, pre-trial questionnaires showed that 26 potential jurors expressed “that they could not be fair and impartial.” He cited a response of a juror citing family members as victims of “ethnic cleansing” and another accusing Israel of committing “genocide.”

Deputy District Attorney Rob Baker argued that public discussion of these views could violate prior court rulings limiting evidence related to the Gaza conflict. “The only thing this procedure will deny the defendants is the ability to bias and indoctrinate the jury panel, which is prohibited by law,” Baker said.

According to his December ruling, the judge limited discussion of the war in Gaza but stopped short of banning it entirely.

Gillis contended that sequestering jurors could backfire — and that jurors who may have strong views can be “rehabilitated” to act objectively.

“Refusal to engage with these topics publicly and collectively would itself chill discussions and further entrench viewpoints,” she said.

Unlike previous hearings, no supporters were present in the courthouse, as all gallery seats were reserved for potential jurors.

As of press time, defense attorneys were still questioning jurors, focusing on their views on police, their ability to remain objective, and how they handle personal biases. One potential juror disclosed working for a human rights and democracy organization but said they believed they could be “very impartial.”

District Attorney Jeff Rosen has previously argued that the protesters crossed a line when they broke into and damaged the office. “Speech is protected by the First Amendment. Vandalism is prosecuted under the penal code,” he said. Prosecutors estimate the damage from the occupation at $360,000 to $1 million, a figure student activists have called “an exaggeration.”

In comparison, most individuals arrested at a 2024 Columbia University protest had charges dropped, while University of Michigan protesters were initially charged with felonies but later had charges dismissed. At a 2024 UCLA Gaza encampment, roughly 200 people were arrested, but the Los Angeles City Attorney declined to file charges. Many of these activists did face administrative sanctions by their respective universities.

Following jury selection, the trial is expected to begin in the coming weeks, though an exact start date has not been set.