A San Francisco jury has found seven pro-Palestine protesters guilty of misdemeanor charges stemming from an April 2024 demonstration that shut down traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge for more than four hours. But the verdict came with a significant crack in the prosecution's case: jurors deadlocked on the felony conspiracy charge that could have sent the defendants to prison for up to 15 years.
After seven days of deliberation, the jury convicted each of the seven defendants of six misdemeanor counts including false imprisonment and obstruction of thoroughfare. One defendant, Sara Cantor, faced an additional misdemeanor charge of refusing to disperse. Jurors could not reach agreement on a separate misdemeanor trespassing charge, leaving prosecutors to decide whether to retry those deadlocked counts.
The convictions carry sentences ranging from five years to five-and-a-half years in county jail. Sentencing is scheduled for August 21. The group had originally been among 26 people arrested during the bridge action, dubbed the "Golden Gate 26." Charges against 19 of those arrestees were later dropped or deferred.
Prosecutors, led by Assistant District Attorney Angela Roze, portrayed the protest as a coordinated conspiracy to trap motorists and restrict their movement. District Attorney Brooke Jenkins had characterized the blockade as creating unacceptable safety risks when she brought charges four months after the incident.
Defense attorneys argued the protesters were exercising moral obligation to oppose what they described as genocide, and that the bridge action came after conventional advocacy channels such as contacting elected representatives had failed. The defendants participated as part of a nationwide tax day protest opposing US military and financial support for Israel. Legal counsel for two of the defendants, the San Francisco Public Defender's Office, maintained the protest amounted to routine civil disobedience common in the Bay Area.
The deadlocked jury verdict on the most serious charge prompted criticism from civil rights advocates. Rachel Lederman, a senior attorney with the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund supporting the defendants, said she was "flabbergasted" prosecutors had not reduced charges to misdemeanors after dropping charges against the majority of those arrested. "It's just outrageous and unprecedented that these seven people are continuing to be prosecuted for felony conspiracy for doing a fairly routine, for the Bay Area, civil disobedience action," Lederman said at trial.
A public defender representing one of the defendants, Nuha Abusamra, declared the mixed verdict a win. "Today remains a victory," she said following the verdict. "We do not fight solely to win. We fight for the resistance."
Before trial even began, another dispute had erupted over restitution. The Golden Gate Bridge authority made an unusual demand for compensation for toll revenue lost during the shutdown. Critics noted the authority had never previously sought restitution from traffic-blocking protesters, pointing to the demand as evidence the defendants were being singled out for their political views. The San Francisco Public Defender's Office publicly objected to the district attorney's office soliciting restitution claims via social media. Those claims were ultimately resolved with individual defendants paying amounts ranging from three to low-four-figure sums.
The Golden Gate Bridge, connecting San Francisco and Marin County, has hosted numerous high-profile protests since the late 1980s supporting causes ranging from the AIDS crisis and environmentalism to Black Lives Matter.
Author James Rodriguez: "The jury's deadlock on conspiracy sends a message that overreach here looks bad, but misdemeanor convictions still hurt these defendants and chill future protests."
Comments