THE PROSECUTION’S CASE DAY 4
In the continuation of the prosecution’s case today, we heard testimony from California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer Leslie Poteet and three commuters that were delayed on the bridge due to the April 15th, 2024 act of civil disobedience on trial here.
Testimony of Officer Poteet
On April 15th, 2024, Officer Poteet arrived at the Alexander Avenue exit, north of the Golden Gate Bridge (GGB) around 8 AM along with a trainee. She described the traffic jam she saw leading onto GGB and cars traveling counterflow to exit the traffic as she waited for instructions from Captain Carlton, a prosecution witness from the previous day. Hours later, when the 26 protestors were arrested, they had their property searched and taken from them, with all but their phones returned when they were released from jail ~2 days later. Poteet was the holder of this confiscated property and identified the seized property of the 7 defendants by refreshing her memory using official property receipts. As part of her investigative duties after the action, she reviewed video footage, compiled a report, and created composites with pictures and screenshots that were used for in-court identification of the defendants standing trial. She also identified a Black Honda CRV that was captured in security footage from a February 14th, 2024 act of civil disobedience on the GGB where no protestors were arrested or charged. Banners from the February action read ‘Stop Arming Israel’ and ‘Hands off Rafah’, as Israel threatened to invade the only ‘safe’ zone in Gaza since the current phase of the genocide began on October 7th, 2023. Between the time of the two actions thousands of people in Gaza had been murdered by Israel, with rubble and tents turned into dust. The prosecution attempted to draw the matching cars into testimony to demonstrate some form of conspiracy over time. Poteet testified that no defendant in the case was identified in the February action. A juror asked if Poteet knew who the black Honda CRV was registered to, to which she responded that she didn’t know.
Officer Poteet testified that no one was restrained in their vehicles, defendants were not interacting with the motorists, no ‘offensive’ language was used on the bridge, and the protest was peaceful on all accounts. She knew ‘to some extent’ the purpose of the protest and had seen the sign that said ‘Stop the World for Gaza’. When questioned on the counterflow traffic, or traffic moving against the typical flow, she said that she had been trained in supporting it, and saw the CHP had been directing counterflow traffic since the beginning of the action.
Testimony of JK
JK was a resident of Larkspur in Marin County on April 15th, 2024 and commuted to San Francisco 3 days a week for her part-time job in the Structural Heart Outpatient Program at Kaiser Permanente. Her commute time was typically 25 minutes and she drove to work either via the Golden Gate or Bay Bridge. On the day of the action, she first saw the traffic arrive at a standstill close to 8 AM, which she described as being in a ‘parking lot’ of cars. She responded to District Attorney Jenkins (SF DA) / CHP Marin’s social media post soliciting commuters to come forward as ‘victims’ of the action because she felt ‘wronged’ and ‘trapped’ with nowhere to go. She also testified to feeling ‘anxious’ due to her fear of heights. She however left her car, like many other commuters, to stretch her legs and get fresh air. During cross-examination she was asked a series of questions regarding her response to the solicitation by CHP-Marin. She didn’t remember the time or contents of the solicitation, did not remember what questions she was asked, the fact that the SF DA had asked people to come forward because they felt ‘detained against their will’, or the fact that her information and responses would be shared with the SF DA’s office to form a bulk of the case against the protestors. She shared that nurses at her work covered for one another and there was an option to bring in per diem nurses to fill in gaps in care, when needed. She had never before looked closely at instances where she was stuck in traffic nor had she contacted CHP to lodge complaints when this had happened.
Testimony of MB
MB was a single mom of a 4 and 6 year olds and San Francisco resident on April 15th, 2024. She was commuting back to San Francisco from Novato, CA on the day of the action, on the way to drop off her kids at school. MB kicked off her testimony by sharing that she did not want to be in court and was merely complying with the government’s subpoena. She was caught in the bridge traffic a few lanes behind the protest and witnessed the initial set-up. she and her kids ate their younger child’s lunch, watched Netflix, walked around, and mingled with other commuters waiting in traffic. She saw people pass granola bars and water bottles, a distribution that presumably stopped once the police formed a line blocking commuters from the protestors. A defense attorney and MB bonded over the two-door trick for peeing familiar to many parents.
Community members offering CLIF granola bars on the Golden Gate Bridge on April 15th, 2024
When the protest began MB felt a “little bit of uncertainty” about the protest and her kids were “curious”. A community member, also stuck in the traffic, stepped out of her car and waved a small Palestinian flag to show her support for the action. She was not wearing a safety vest like the protestors and felt content being stuck in traffic because she believed the actions of the protestors were important given U.S. complicity and enablement of the genocide in Gaza. 15 minutes into the protest MB felt “nervous” and “intimidated” and was worried “things could escalate”. 30 minutes into the protest MB felt “powerless,..., especially with her kids there”. However, her kids were calm and busy. She didn’t want to testify in court because of the ongoing feeling of “intimidation”. She assessed the situation on the bridge continuously, considering whether to leave her car and walk back to Marin on foot but decided against it since she expected law enforcement to clear the protest quickly and her 4 year old didn’t like to walk.
Commuter on April 15th, 2024 waves a Palestinian flag in solidarity with the actions of the protestors
MB reported her experience to the CHP “because they asked” and because she “didn’t think it was right”. She believed in people’s right to protest but also believed people should have the right to leave a protest. With the news helicopters circling above during the action she was concerned that it appeared that everyone on the bridge was part of the action and she did not enjoy being represented as such. MB was intimidated by the messaging of the protest, specifically around the chants, “From the River to the Sea” and “Not Another Penny, Not Another Dime, No More Money for Israel’s Crimes”. It wasn’t the intent behind these chants but her interpretation of them that made her uneasy, she testified. MB expressed feeling nervous because the protestors might have weapons. Armed law enforcement did arrive on the scene in droves in full ‘SWAT’ gear and formed perimeters around the protestors. MB didn’t remember officers telling her that she couldn’t leave, nor was she instructed to stay in her car. She also testified that the protest was not violent.
After exiting the bridge MB and her kids went to a cafe to eat, drink, use the restroom and she subsequently drove her kids to their after-school program so she could have some alone time. At the end of her testimony MB reiterated her feelings of discontent with the inconvenience caused from the protest. Late last year she had collected a restitution check from the GG26 to cover her kid’s school tuition for the day. A defense attorney asked her if her feelings would change if she learned that over a million children were displaced from their homes in Gaza during the 4 hours she was on the bridge, with their parents being unable to provide them with any help or reprieve. This question was immediately stricken from the record by Judge Caffese.
Testimony of JW
JW is a mortgage broker, a resident of Marin County since 1992, and worked in San Francisco on April 15th, 2024. On the day of the action, JW was looking forward to a big sales meeting where he was to share interesting trade secrets, had many conference calls, and presentations. He was able to take some meetings and reschedule others from his car.
When cars a few rows ahead of him stopped on the bridge he thought it was a police car performing a ‘swerving’ maneuver to halt the traffic. When he saw the protestors in vests with banners he took matters into his own hands, per his testimony and as seen in a video shown by the prosecution in court. With ‘his mind in a million other places’ and ‘not understanding what was happening’ JW charged at the protestors, pushing people out of his way, screaming, and tearing the banner that said ‘End of the Siege on Gaza Now’ not once, not twice, but three times. He called his conduct ‘animated’ and not ‘angry’ because ‘anger had a negative connotation’. He intended to ‘go to the banner and place it on the side of the road’, after which he believed the protest would end. In an interview on April 17th, 2024 on the John Kobylt Show he shared he intended on throwing the banner over the bridge. On the show he called the protest a ‘minor inconvenience’. He had also seen the porta potties on the bridge ‘not too far away’, and called them ‘orange buildings’ in court.
As he did in the radio interview, JW reiterated that he ‘didn’t understand to this day’ why law enforcement didn’t just move the median barrier and let the commuters ‘go around’. He reached out to CHP after he saw a news clip of his attack on the protestors. JW testified that he ‘personally didn’t like to live in fear’ and he was testifying despite his ‘fear of retribution’. When further questioned on this, he shared that it wasn’t his own fear but the fear of his loved ones, whom he checks in with once a month - serving as a regular reminder of the day of the action. He testified that the protestors were associated themselves with people who had ‘committed lots of violence’ and he didn’t know ‘how far that travels’. When probed on this particular sentiment, Judge Caffese over-ruled the line of questioning.
JW had forgotten to bring along his coffee that morning.
Testimony of BL
BL was a resident of Marin County on April 15th, 2024 and was heading to the Bay Area to do an MRI for a brain surgery scheduled for later that month. He was able to reschedule the MRI for the following day without an issue. He was stopped in traffic ~50 feet from the North tower. BL found the stopping of the Northbound traffic strange and heard on the news that the traffic was a result of an ongoing protest.
BL saw that law enforcement weren’t helping commuters take the Alexander Avenue exit a 100 yards away from the bridge and decided to take matters into his own hands. One-by-one, he helped cars turn around and exit the bridge, supporting ~180 vehicles to drive counterflow in just 1.5 hours. ‘Some called me a hero’, he said. He watched CHP and bridge authorities just watching, and not helping. Once the roadway was clear for his own exit, he passed the baton of redirecting traffic to another commuter. He didn’t consider leaving his car and returning to Marin on foot because “he was not rich”.
BL was irritated at the time of the action. He however felt ‘conflicted’ about testifying for the prosecution and ‘ashamed’ about accepting restitution because he believed in the Palestinian cause. The reasons, he testified, were obvious - Palestinian’s were ‘a poor people’, ‘had been kicked for so long by a wealthy nation’, and ‘look what is happening to us now’. BL, members of the defense, and audience members were in tears.
The jury had some questions for BL. They were curious if he felt unsafe redirecting traffic. He didn’t. Did people comply with his direction? Everyone but one did. Was CHP allowing cars off Alexander Avenue? Yes, they were. In closing, BL reiterated that he didn’t feel unsafe or held against his will.
A hero, indeed.