SAN JOSE, Calif. — A Santa Clara County judge declared a mistrial Friday after jurors said they could not reach unanimous verdicts on felony vandalism and conspiracy to trespass charges against five current and former Stanford University students accused of damaging the university president and provost’s offices during a pro-Palestinian protest. Prosecutors said the Stanford mistrial will be retried, keeping one of the rare felony cases tied to the 2024 campus protest wave headed back to court, Feb. 13, 2026.
Stanford mistrial: jury split on felony vandalism and conspiracy counts
Superior Court Judge Hanley Chew declared a mistrial after concluding jurors were “hopelessly deadlocked” following days of deliberations. Jurors were divided 9-3 in favor of conviction on the felony vandalism count and 8-4 in favor of conviction on the felony conspiracy to trespass count, according to an Associated Press account of the proceedings.
Chew asked jurors in open court whether more time would help break the impasse. Each juror said it would not, and Chew dismissed them.
Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen said his office plans to try the case again. “This case is about a group of people who destroyed someone else’s property,” Rosen said in a statement announcing the retrial effort.
Defense attorneys argued that the protest was protected political expression and that prosecutors failed to prove intent to damage property beyond a reasonable doubt. Deputy public defender Avi Singh said the defense believed “the proof was insufficient” after jurors weighed the evidence and arguments.
If convicted, the defendants faced up to three years in prison and would have been ordered to pay more than $300,000 in restitution, prosecutors said.
What happened inside the president’s office
The felony case stems from an early-morning demonstration June 5, 2024, when a group of protesters forced entry into Stanford’s Building 10, which houses the offices of the president and provost. Prosecutors said demonstrators spray-painted the building, broke windows and furniture, disabled security cameras and splattered a red liquid described as fake blood.
The protest was part of a broader national push for universities to divest from companies linked to Israel amid the Israel-Hamas war. During the occupation, protesters renamed the building “Dr. Adnan’s Office,” a reference to Palestinian doctor Adnan Al-Bursh, Reuters reported.
Five defendants opted to go to trial: Hunter Taylor-Black, Maya Burke, Germán González, Taylor McCann and Amy Zhai. The Stanford mistrial does not resolve whether the group’s actions amounted to criminal vandalism or were, as the defense framed it, civil disobedience that escalated into property damage.
What comes next after the Stanford mistrial
A mistrial typically leaves prosecutors with options to retry the same charges, offer new plea deals, or drop the case. Rosen has said he will pursue a retrial, and a court hearing to set a new date is scheduled for Feb. 25, according to KQED’s reporting from the Hall of Justice.
The deadlock also underscores the high bar prosecutors face in cases where jurors disagree sharply about protest, property damage and intent. Even with majorities favoring conviction on both counts, unanimity is required for a guilty verdict.
How the case built toward the Stanford mistrial
June 2024: Police arrested 13 people after protesters barricaded themselves inside the president’s office and supporters linked arms outside, according to The Guardian’s coverage of the occupation. Stanford officials said the building suffered extensive damage and that students involved faced immediate discipline.
April 2025: Prosecutors filed felony vandalism charges and alleged a “conspiracy to occupy” the building, saying at least one person entered by breaking a window, Reuters reported when charges were announced.
October 2025: A Santa Clara County grand jury indicted 11 protesters after one person became a cooperating witness, moving the case straight toward trial, according to The Stanford Daily’s account of the indictment.
January-February 2026: Trial testimony focused on whether defendants planned property destruction or used protective gear out of fear of being injured during police action. The jury’s deadlock, and the resulting Stanford mistrial, leaves both sides preparing for another round in court.
Broader impact beyond Stanford
Across the U.S., about 3,200 people were arrested during campus protests in 2024, and many criminal cases tied to the demonstrations were later dismissed or reduced. The Stanford mistrial stands out because it involves felony counts, a substantial restitution claim and a district attorney who has publicly signaled he will press ahead.
For the defendants and their supporters, the Stanford mistrial offered a temporary reprieve but not closure. For prosecutors, it was an immediate setback — and a test of whether a second jury will see the protest as a crime or constitutionally protected action that spiraled into damage.
