La convicción moral no es intención criminal»: los manifestantes del puente Golden Gate celebran la victoria en el fallo judicial
- 4 hours ago
- 5 min read
Por Christopher Alam
SAN FRANCISCO — Siete activistas del Área de la Bahía, que estaban siendo juzgados por una manifestación a favor de Palestina en 2024 que bloqueó el puente Golden Gate durante cuatro horas, fueron declarados culpables de múltiples delitos menores el jueves 2 de julio.
El jurado no llegó a un veredicto unánime sobre el cargo más grave, el de conspiración para cometer un delito grave, lo que llevó a los acusados a declarar una victoria bienvenida, aunque parcial.
« Hoy es una victoria», declaró la defensora pública Noha Abusamra en una rueda de prensa tras el veredicto, en las escaleras del Ayuntamiento. «No luchamos solo para ganar. Luchamos por el simple hecho de luchar», añadió, refiriéndose a la defensa constante de los palestinos frente a la continua agresión israelí.
Esta cuestión fue fundamental para la defensa en el caso, que giraba en torno a la cuestión de la intención.
Los abogados de los acusados argumentaron que su motivación para llevar a cabo la protesta era la protección de la vida, en este caso la de los palestinos que han sufrido lo que grupos de derechos humanos, organismos internacionales y un número creciente de países califican de genocidio.
More than 73,000 Palestinians have been killed since Israel’s assault on Gaza following the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas, which resulted in some 1,200 deaths, including more than 800 civilians. Many Palestinians continue to face extreme hunger and privation.
River Allen, one of seven defendants in the case, leaves the courtroom Thursday after hearing the verdict. (Credit Peter Schurmann)
In bringing the felony conspiracy charge, San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins argued the protestor’s actions threatened public safety. The day after the protest she issued a public call to “anyone who was falsely imprisoned on the Golden Gate Bridge,” promising restitution.
Critics, including some legal experts, have criticized the DA’s approach as “a classic overprosecution of an act of civil disobedience,” warning that it would have a chilling effect on public dissent.
Attorney Katherine Isa, who represented one of the defendants in the case, Conrad de Jesus, accused the DA’s office of anti-Palestinian bias.
“This is the first time they have sought felony charges, conspiracy charges against a group of individuals protesting in this manner,” she said during Thursday’s press conference. “We’ve had protests on the Bay Bridge that have also blocked it for four hours. We’ve had protests throughout history on the Golden Gate Bridge. None of which were prosecuted in this way.”
Defendants had sought to force Jenkins to recuse herself from the case, citing meetings she’d held with officials from the Israeli consulate in 2023 and past remarks describing anti-war protestors as “pro-Hamas.”
Jenkins said Thursday after the ruling her office would “consider next steps,” amid concerns she could opt to retry the case.
Rocky Chau hugs supporters outside the San Francisco Superior Courtroom Thursday, July 2. (Credit Peter Schurmann)
The jury remained narrowly split on the felony charge with 10 jurors having voted guilty. On the misdemeanor count of trespassing to interfere with a business, 11 jurors voted not guilty, with one holdout. Judge Teresa Caffese declared a mistrial on both charges.
The defendants, Sarah Ferrell, Conrad de Jesus, Em Tillotson, Bhavika Anandpura, Rocky Chau, Sara Cantor, and River Allen, were convicted of four misdemeanor counts of false imprisonment, and one count each of obstruction of a thoroughfare and unlawful assembly. Cantor was also found guilty of one count of refusal to disperse from a riot.
They faced prison terms of up to 15 years had they been convicted of the felonies. Public defender Anthony Gedeon said at the press conference that the verdicts could mean a maximum of five years in prison for each. Cantor faces potentially five and a half years.
The defense team says they will appeal the guilty verdicts.
“This case will be remembered in history,” said Abusamra. “It is precedent for the movement. It is precedent for all lawyers. It is precedent for our human rights in America.”
Dozens of supporters packed the courthouse Thursday, most draped in keffiyehs, the traditional checkered scarf and now ubiquitous symbol of Palestinian solidarity.
As the foreman read the guilty verdicts, some began crying silently. Misty eyes scanned the room for comfort. Abusamra could be seen weeping next to colleague Gedeon, who held his head in apparent disbelief. Defendant Anandpura was mouthing what appeared to be “it’ll all be ok” to someone in the audience.
Judge Caffese then began to thank the jury for its dedication to the case, and remarking on the efficacy of the court system. The crowd audibly scoffed at this and began drowning out the judge with coughs. When Judge Caffese ordered the courtroom cleared of everyone except the media and attorneys, the noise turned into jeers, with calls of “Shame!” and “The justice system does not work!” Some yelled at the jury directly, saying, “You should all be ashamed of yourselves.”
As the judge made her final remarks to the jury, protest chants reverberated in the hallway outside the courtroom. Ananpura addressed the crowd later.
Defense attorney Shaffy Moeel addresses a crowd on the steps of San Francisco City Hall on
Thursday, July 2. Behind her are defendants Conrad de Jesus, River Allen and Bhavika Anandpura. (Credit: Peter Schurmann)
“You know when we stopped that bridge, we did not think that we alone would stop the genocide. But we weren’t alone then. We’re not alone now.”
In the April 15, 2024 protest, activists demonstrating against U.S. support for Israel drove southbound onto the Golden Gate Bridge at around 8 am and stopped their cars in all lanes. Traffic was halted for around four hours. The protest was part of a nationwide day of action in coordination with other major cities.
Jenkins said at the time that the demonstration caused “extreme threats to the health and welfare of those trapped” on the bridge. In August 2024, her office filed charges against 26 members of the protest, including 8 with felonies. One of those felony cases was dropped, while 18 others with misdemeanors were diverted or dismissed.
“Whatever you think of the protest method, the jury decided that the criminal law was the wrong tool to use against them in finding that the government did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt a conspiracy charge,” said defense attorney Shaffy Moeel.
“Moral conviction is not criminal intent,” she added.
The jury began deliberating on June 5, nearly 2 years after the action in question. The jury was tasked with deciding whether the state had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the protestors were guilty of the 57 charges brought against them. These charges are reduced from the original 1,144 charges filed in August 2024.
“No les pedimos que estén de acuerdo con lo que hicieron nuestros clientes el 15 de abril de 2024. Nunca lo hicimos”, dijo Moeel. “Les pedimos a doce personas que determinaran si la fiscalía había probado la intención criminal más allá de toda duda razonable. La respuesta fue no. No pudieron probarla. Y así es como se ve la justicia. Eso es lo que estamos luchando por proteger en este tribunal y en todas partes”.
Los siete acusados serán sentenciados el 21 de agosto.
Peter Schurmann colaboró con la información para este artículo.
Comments