Section 1: Summary

Header Block

• Date: March 11, 2026
• Court / Case: US District Court, Northern District of Texas — USA v. Cameron Arnold et al. (also styled USA v. Cameron Hill et al.)
• Judge: Mark Pittman
• Prosecution present: Shawn Smith (lead prosecutor / “Gato”)
• Defense attorneys present: Cody Cofer (Autumn Hill), Patrick McClain / Bradley Sauer / Brian Bouffard (Zachary Evetts), Phillip Hayes (Benjamin Song), Chris Tolbert (Savanna Batten), J. Warren St. John / David Miles Brissette (Meagan Morris), MarQuetta A. Clayton (Maricela Rueda), Blake Ryan Burns / Harmony Schuerman (Liz Soto), Leigh Davis (Ines Soto), Christopher James Weinbel / Rachel Taft (Daniel Sanchez Estrada)
• Defendants present: Autumn Hill, Zachary Evetts, Benjamin “Champagne” Song, Savanna Batten, Meagan Morris, Maricela “Mari” Rueda, Liz Soto, Ines Soto, Daniel “Des” Sanchez Estrada
• Type of proceeding: Jury trial — jury charge conference, jury instructions, closing arguments (prosecution and all defense), prosecution rebuttal
• Media present: New York Times, Associated Press, Gothamist; Star-Telegram also referenced

---

Excerpt

After nearly three weeks of trial, both sides delivered closing arguments to the jury in the Prairieland case. The prosecution urged the jury to find all eight defendants charged with conspiracy guilty under a conspiracy and Pinkerton liability theory. Meanwhile nine defense attorneys argued that the government presented evidence, but not proof, that the defendants attended a noise demonstration — not an ambush — and that political beliefs and legal gun ownership are not crimes. The jury will begin deliberations on March 12 at 9:00 AM.

---

Key Takeaways

• Jury charge finalized after extensive argument. The judge worked until midnight on a 90–100 page jury charge. Several significant changes were made at defense request: the phrases “to incite a riot,” “inciting,” “promoting,” “encouraging,” and “urging” were removed from the riot charge as constitutionally overbroad. The prosecution agreed to these removals. The defense also objected to the transfer of intent doctrine being applied to attempted murder charges, citing De La Rosa v. Lynaugh (5th Cir. 1987) and People v. Bland (Cal. 2002). The judge called the California case “very compelling” and said he would consider.
• Prosecution closing (~50 minutes): Prosecutor Shawn Smith argued a unified conspiracy theory under Pinkerton liability, framing Song as the ringleader of an antifa-aligned group that planned an armed confrontation at Prairieland Detention Center on July 4, 2025. He emphasized operational security (Signal, Faraday bags, phones going dark), black bloc tactics, the presence of firearms and IFAKs, and post-incident deletion of messages and movement of documents by Sanchez as evidence of criminal intent and cover-up.
• Defense closings (~15 minutes each, nine attorneys): Defense attorneys collectively argued: (1) there is a difference between evidence and proof; (2) the plan was a noise demonstration with fireworks for detainees, not an ambush; (3) Song was the only person who fired a weapon, and his initial volley lasted one second and was aimed at the ground; (4) cooperating witnesses (Baumann, Thomas, Kent, Sikes) are unreliable and were coached; (5) most defendants had no connection to firearms, no presence in planning chats, and no foreknowledge of any shooting; (6) the government is criminalizing political beliefs, book clubs, and protest attendance.
• Jury deliberations begin March 12 at 9:00 AM. Alternate jurors 52 and 53 were released. The jury chose to hear all closings in one day (with breaks), finishing around 7:30 PM.
• Courtroom seating dispute. During a break, all non-law-enforcement family and friends were asked to leave and seats were reshuffled to accommodate journalists, with roughly one-third of the courtroom reserved for law enforcement. The judge framed this as a conscience issue for audience members to consider for themselves, urging attendees to reflect on whether the moral thing to do is let a family member have their seat in the smaller Fort Worth courtroom versus the Dallas overflow room.

---

Narrative Summary

Morning: Jury Charge Conference (~12:00–12:45 PM)

The day began with the jury eating lunch while the judge and attorneys finalized the jury charge document — a 90–100 page set of instructions the judge reported working on until midnight the previous night. The judge announced that the government would receive 75 minutes for closing arguments and each defense attorney would receive 15 minutes.

Transfer of intent. The government sought to include a “transferred intent” instruction for the attempted murder charges (Counts 5–7). Defense objected, arguing that attempted murder requires specific intent to kill the named victim, and that transferred intent — where intent aimed at one person is legally transferred to an unintended victim — does not apply to attempt crimes. Defense cited De La Rosa v. Lynaugh, 817 F.2d 259 (5th Cir. 1987), p. 242, footnote 3, and People v. Bland, 26 Cal. 4th 313, p. 328. The defense argued that if transferred intent were applied, it would water the charge down to manslaughter. The prosecution responded by citing doctrine going back to a 1576 case: “It’s every man’s business to foresee… ill intentions.” The judge called the California case “very compelling” and said he would consider.

Attorney Clayton (for Rueda) noted no new evidence came out during trial that would justify adding the transferred intent instruction.

Riot charge language. Defense attorney McClain (for Evetts) objected that the phrases “to incite” and “inciting” were not in the indictment and should not be in the jury charge. He further argued that 18 USC § 2102 is constitutionally overbroad, citing a 2nd Circuit case (D’Urso [phonetic], 2012), a 4th Circuit case (972 F.3d, 2020), and the 9th Circuit’s Rundo, 990 F.3d (2021). The prosecution agreed to remove “to incite a riot,” “inciting,” “promoting,” “encouraging,” and “urging” from the riot charge. The phrase “to incite” was changed to “to organize” and “inciting” to “organizing.”

Other charge issues. Defense raised that the attempted murder counts (5–7) varied from the indictment regarding correctional officers who were unnamed / identified only by pseudonym. Defense argued under Rule 29 that “you can’t kill a fake name” — the pseudonyms had never been linked to real individuals. The prosecution responded that officer testimony (Harp) established which officers came out first and second. The judge also addressed a scrivener’s error regarding “Department of Defense” vs. “Department of War,” settling on “Department of Defense (War).” Defense requested he/she pronouns be used in the charge; the judge agreed to use “he/she.”

The charge was finalized during a roughly 30-minute printing break (~12:47–1:38 PM).

Courtroom seating incident. During the break, all non-law-enforcement family members and supporters were asked to leave the courtroom. Seats were reshuffled to accommodate journalists (6 journalists and Nathan Baumann’s attorney were given spaces). Approximately one-third of the courtroom was reserved for law enforcement. Note-taker ES observed the judge had “shifted blame for his decision to move the trial to a smaller courtroom.”

Afternoon: Jury Instructions (~1:35–2:45 PM)

The judge read the jury charge aloud, providing each juror with a copy to follow along. Key instructions included:

• The indictment is not evidence of guilt; defendants are presumed innocent.
• The government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Each count and each defendant must be considered separately.
• Jurors must accept the government-provided English translation of Spanish-language evidence (Sanchez Exhibit 1) even if they speak Spanish.
• Plea bargaining is lawful and proper; cooperating witness testimony should be evaluated with care.
• Punishment is solely the judge’s responsibility and should not factor into deliberations.
• Verdicts must be unanimous.

The judge then reviewed the charges count by count:

Count	Charge	Defendants
1	Aiding & abetting rioting (18 USC § 2101)	Hill, Evetts, Song, Batten, Morris, Rueda, L. Soto, I. Soto
2	Material support to terrorism	Hill, Evetts, Song, Batten, Morris, Rueda, L. Soto, I. Soto
3	Conspiracy to use/carry explosive to commit felony (18 USC § 844(m))	Hill, Evetts, Song, Batten, Morris, Rueda, L. Soto, I. Soto
4	Use & carry explosive during felony	Hill, Evetts, Song, Batten, Morris, Rueda, L. Soto, I. Soto
5	Attempted murder of government officer/employee	Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
6	Attempted murder (officer 2)	Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
7	Attempted murder (officer 3)	Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
8	Discharging firearm during crime of violence	Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
9	Discharging firearm during crime of violence	Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
10	Discharging firearm during crime of violence	Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
11	Corruptly concealing a document/record (18 USC § 1519 [?])	Sanchez Estrada
12	Conspiracy to conceal documents	Rueda, Sanchez Estrada

The judge explained Pinkerton liability (Pinkerton v. USA, 1946): a co-conspirator can be held responsible for offenses committed by other co-conspirators if the offenses were reasonably foreseeable.

Alternate jurors 52 and 53 were identified but not yet released.

Prosecution Closing Arguments (~3:07 PM, ~50 minutes)

Prosecutor Shawn Smith opened by asking a series of rhetorical questions: “Why riot? Why wear black bloc? Why pay cash for fireworks? Why put your phone in a Faraday bag? Because you know you’re about to do something illegal.”

Core theory: Smith argued that Song was the ringleader of a group bound together by antifa ideology and tactics. Song’s “affinity group” — including Morris and Hill at the 56th Street residence — planned a confrontation at Prairieland Detention Center, not a peaceful protest. Smith cited Signal chat messages about risk assessment, affinity groups, and building momentum toward confrontation. He played the bodycam video of the shooting with loud audio.

Key prosecution arguments:

• Song trained his group in suppressive fire, idolized an anarchist who attempted to burn down an ICE facility, and said three times “I’m not going to jail.”
• Evetts timed how long the detention center gate stayed open — evidence of planning beyond a noise demo.
• Fireworks (technically explosives burning at 1,500°F) were thrown at the facility, constituting malicious attempted destruction of government property.
• Black bloc provided “complete anonymity” — it worked, as no faces are visible on bodycam or CCTV.
• All phones went dark simultaneously; phones were later recovered in Faraday bags.
• The Soto vehicle circled the block three times before parking a block away.
• After the shooting, defendants practiced “deblocking” (removing black clothing), walking away calmly. Ines Soto told someone “We’re out for a walk.”
• Post-incident, defendants deleted Signal messages. Hill told others “don’t talk about it” and to “double down on OPSEC.”
• Sanchez drove to Rueda’s house (spending 5.5 hours there), then to the Denton apartment, moving a box of documents. Smith argued this was real-world operational security — hiding “insurrectionary” materials connecting the defendants.
• Song was arrested 11 days later; the group went to “extreme lengths” to help him escape.

Pinkerton / foreseeability: Smith argued it was reasonably foreseeable that Song would shoot a cop, given that all co-defendants knew his capabilities and plans. He showed a Venn diagram of overlapping groups (EGBC, Antifa, SRA) converging on “direct militant action.”

Smith concluded: Song fired until his weapon jammed. “If that rifle hadn’t jammed,” he would have killed the officer. The conspiracy made all defendants responsible.

Objection by defense — characterized as misstatement of law — overruled.

Defense Closing Arguments (~4:20–7:30 PM, with breaks)

Attorney Leigh Davis — Opening overview for all defendants:
Davis thanked the jury and set the legal stage. He emphasized the high burden of proof for each charge: attempted murder requires malice and forethought (“not accidental, not reckless”); Counts 8–10 require that a firearm was actually discharged; Counts 11–12 require knowing, corrupt concealment with intent to impair justice — “not just moving a box.” He stressed that mere presence does not prove conspiracy and that the riot charge cannot include advocacy of beliefs.

Attorney Cody Cofer — Autumn Hill:
Cofer argued the government spent two weeks “telling witnesses what to say and you what to think.” He said Hill never owned guns, was not part of SRA, had no fingerprints on any weapon, no digital evidence of gun involvement, and no evidence she viewed the Signal chat messages about July 4. She was not in the “4th of July chat.” The chat she was in (“D&N”) discussed bringing the temperature down, not planning an ambush. Cofer attacked Baumann’s credibility — he lied about Seth Sikes doing the vandalism until he got a plea deal, then changed his story. Baumann did not know Hill. The “ambush” theory was undermined by the fact that two unarmed guards walked past Song without being shot. Hill showed up, picked up trash, and left. Her phone was at home; Song did not contact her after the incident. New video frames showed fireworks not hitting the building. Cofer concluded: “We have a 1st Amendment right, a 2nd Amendment right, and a 6th Amendment right to a jury trial to protect ourselves from the government.”

Attorney Bouffard/Sauer — Zachary Evetts:
Defense argued “Fireworks on the 4th of July — that’s all this was planned to be.” Evetts was calling out “Esperanza” (hope) to detainees. Baumann did vandalism on his own, initially blaming Sikes, then shifting blame to Evetts only after his plea deal. The government never asked Baumann to identify Evetts directly. The riot charge requires three or more participants in violence — only two people (Baumann and possibly Sikes) were in the parking lot doing property damage. Defense challenged the cooperating witnesses: Kent fought back tears when asked about political persecution; Thomas couldn’t identify antifa members without a government-provided list. Regarding the attempted murder charges, defense asked: if this were a planned ambush, why would only Song have a gun in his hand? Two PDC employees walked right past the group. Does that sound like an ambush or a chaotic reaction? Defense urged the jury to read the indictment as a “fantasy” and concluded: “The truth is that Zachary Evetts is not guilty.”

Attorney Phillip Hayes — Benjamin “Champagne” Song:
Hayes called the defendants “well-meaning social misfits who want to help others” who are “afraid of police and leery of law enforcement.” He argued the first person to pull a weapon was Lieutenant Gross, who pointed his gun at a fleeing person’s back. No shots were fired at police until Gross pulled his weapon. Hayes played video in slow motion showing dust clouds from ground impact — arguing the initial volley lasted one second or less and was aimed at the ground, constituting suppressive fire, not attempted murder. He argued the bullet that hit the officer was a ricochet, noting that Song’s gun appeared to have been struck by Gross’s return fire (explaining the jam). Out of 2,000 photos in evidence, there were zero photos of bullet strikes anywhere except the ground. An officer testified it was “a good shoot” (i.e., the return fire was justified), and Ranger Hill discussed bullet strikes on the ground. Hayes emphasized that all Signal messages were defensive in nature. He argued Song had a right to carry firearms (2nd Amendment) and was a “yellow vest” (protest safety vest) wearer. The judge cut Hayes off near the end of his allotted time.

The jury was given three options: stop for the day, go until 7:30, or go to 6 and return tomorrow. The jury chose to finish tonight with a 6:00–6:30 break. The Dallas overflow courtroom (with ~30 people) remained open but restricted.

Attorney Chris Tolbert — Savanna Batten:
Tolbert argued Batten is being prosecuted for participating in a noise demonstration consistent with her political beliefs. He walked through her timeline: on July 3, she was at home (not at the gear check); on July 4, she went to work at Panera Bread until 5 PM, went home, then was picked up by the Sotos at 9:42 PM. FBI raided her apartment on July 5 — she had an Amazon package arriving, showing she expected to be home. They searched for 57 minutes, broke a window and door, and the only item taken was a map planning a “No Kings” protest for October 2025. Of 295 photos on her phone, nothing connected her to a planned ambush. The “most damning” evidence was a photo from an EGBC meeting showing 14 people reading a pamphlet — 3 of whom were defendants. Batten was a backseat passenger in the Sotos’ vehicle; no evidence was found in the car. GPS showed she set off fireworks from 50–100 yards away from the facility — commercial fireworks, not explosives meant to blow anything up. Only 4 of the 12 counts apply to Batten. Tolbert concluded: “The government has not proven anything other than she went to PDC for a noise demonstration.”

Attorney J. Warren St. John — Meagan Morris:
St. John argued that Morris is “not a conspirator to anything.” She went to a noise demonstration and sat in her van. A photo taken by a police officer shows her in the van. She never got out. She was not in the July 4 chat that discussed bringing guns. She had a legal vest and gun in the van but did not participate. She is “terrified of being convicted for something she didn’t do” and has cried during the trial. Not guilty.

Attorney MarQuetta Clayton — Maricela Rueda:
Clayton opened with a quote from a Signal chat the prosecution had skipped over, in which Rueda talked about “making noise — pots and pans, people yelling, so detainees can hear them.” Rueda had a megaphone in her hand. Clayton argued the riot charge requires intent to engage in violence — and every cooperating witness said the plan was a noise demonstration. Morris felt “betrayed” by how it ended because it was not the plan. When detention officers told them to leave, they left. Rueda “is terrified of guns” and would never be involved in a firearms plan. Regarding the document conspiracy (Count 12): Danny (Sanchez) went to Rueda’s house before she even called him; the box contained items from 2022 or earlier with nothing related to July 4; the agent on the stand confirmed nothing in the box was used to charge Rueda. Clayton argued Rueda’s phone call telling Sanchez to “tow the car” was about the car parked at the 56th Street staging location — not evidence of concealment. No evidence of instructions from Rueda to delete anything. “Does having zines, stickers, and anti-fascist ideas make her a terrorist? No.”

Attorney Blake Ryan Burns — Liz Soto:
Burns argued the government “investigated her personal life, turned over every stone” and could only prove two things: she was at Prairieland, and she has a book club the government hates. He challenged the government’s claim that DFW Antifa rebranded as EGBC, noting DFW Antifa’s last post was in 2023 while EGBC started in 2016. The government seized printing presses as evidence but proved nothing with them. Cooperating witnesses said Liz rarely attended protests — usually just social events and book club. Her husband said the protest would be safe, so they went together. She was not in any gun clubs or planning chats. She arrived late, saw fireworks already going off, did not know anyone was armed, and left when asked. She and her husband were not wearing masks and did not run from police. They had no idea someone had been shot. Burns concluded: “The government is asking you to put protesters in prison as terrorists. You are the only people who can stop that.”

Attorney Leigh Davis — Ines Soto:
Davis described Ines as a leader in EGBC who does printing and facilitates discussions — all legal. He’s not in any of the chats about July 4 planning. He did not shoot fireworks. He left when guards came out, well before the shooting. He’s not an SRA member. “Is it a riot if nobody noticed it?” — no damage to the facility, no attempt to break in. He had one pistol in his car (not in his home); the government showed many pictures of guns to mislead. Davis challenged the government’s expert witness on antifa, noting the expert admitted his career could be enhanced by this case. He was not in 3 of 4 chat groups cited as evidence. The victims in Counts 5–7 were never identified by real name in testimony. Not guilty.

Attorney Christopher Weinbel — Daniel “Des” Sanchez Estrada:
Weinbel was described by note-taker RS as the “most high-energy” of all defense attorneys. He argued Sanchez is “on trial for carrying a box and conspiracy to carry a box.” He was arrested because agents thought he might have bombs — he didn’t, but they never walked it back. All they had was a phone call. The Denton apartment was raided; agents broke doors and windows, confiscated items including guns, and have not returned them. The box contained journals, a love letter from 2017, video from 2014, and items from 2022 or earlier. Everything in the box belonged to Sanchez, not Rueda. “Moving his own stuff is not a crime.” The government never showed the jury what in the box was relevant to the case. The agent on the stand confirmed none of the box contents were used to charge Rueda. Weinbel challenged the timeline: Rueda made her phone call while Sanchez was already gone from his house — he went on his own. He argued Sanchez’s phone call (“I’ve contacted some of the homies, everyone’s trying to get things done”) was vague and made in front of children. The government claims Sanchez and Rueda didn’t meet until 2023, but a love letter from 2017 contradicts this — when defense pointed this out, the judge overruled the objection. Weinbel concluded with a quote about arbitrary imprisonment being “the favorite instrument of tyranny.” Not guilty.

Prosecution Rebuttal (~6:50 PM)

Smith returned to Pinkerton liability with a bank robbery analogy: Person A scouts cameras, Person C drives the getaway car, Person B brings a gun and shoots a security guard — all three are guilty of conspiracy. He argued all defendants were “not merely present — they were all masked up.” He addressed specific defense arguments:

• Re: Hill — she left her phone at home (suspicious); there were 2 AR-15 rifles in the van; 13 people were all blacked out.
• Re: Morris — she drove people there; her ID was found in the car.
• Re: Evetts — he texted about slashing tires; he was the only one wearing kneepads.
• Re: Sanchez — the box connected the defendants; Rueda wanted the car moved because it was at the “staging” location. Sanchez was at Rueda’s house for 5.5 hours. “Your wife is in jail and the most important thing you need to do is take an insignificant box?”
• Re: Sotos and Batten — CCTV footage shows them 30 seconds before the shooting; they were not charged with attempted murder only because they weren’t in Song’s inner circle or the gear check.
• Re: Rueda — she said “tow it” (giving direction to hide evidence); she avoided saying the 56th Street address because that’s where they all staged.
• Re: Song — Gross shot Song’s rifle, causing the jam. If the rifle hadn’t jammed, Song would have fired all 60 rounds and killed the officer.
• Smith noted Ines said fireworks are illegal in Alvarado — showing awareness of illegality.
• There were no pots and pans at PDC; there were rifles, body armor, and trauma IFAKs.
• “All of this was foreseeable.”

Defense objection to Smith’s characterization of Sanchez — overruled.

Smith also noted that defense said Sanchez and Rueda met in 2023, but a love letter from 2017 contradicts this. Defense objected, saying they never made that claim. Judge overruled.

End of Day (~7:30 PM)

The judge told the jury that all evidence was now before them. Alternate jurors 52 and 53 were released from duty (with instructions to continue following rules until notified). The remaining jurors were instructed to discuss the case only in the deliberation room.

Jury will begin deliberating at 9:00 AM on March 12, 2026.

The judge noted he has a hearing at 1:00 PM on March 12 and obligations on Friday — describing himself as the “busiest in the country.” He mentioned canceling a spring break trip.

Note-taker ES observed that the jury may have left with unredacted copies of the charging documents, and that the defense appeared surprised and was objecting at the end of the session.

---

Incidents and Atmosphere

• Courtroom seating dispute / supporter exclusion: During the printing break, all non-law-enforcement family and friends were removed from the courtroom to make room for journalists. Approximately one-third of the courtroom was reserved for law enforcement. Note-taker ES characterized this as the judge “shifting blame for his decision to move the trial to a smaller courtroom.” The Dallas overflow room had approximately 30 people.
• Overflow courtroom feed issues: Note-taker SO reported that at 11:05 AM, the video and audio feed to the Dallas overflow room was muted “on request of the court.” An attorney called IT, who confirmed this was intentional. The feed was restored at 11:30 AM to an empty courtroom.
• Media presence: New York Times, Associated Press, and Gothamist were confirmed in the courtroom. The Star-Telegram was also referenced by the judge (commenting that the Star-Telegram “sure likes Miles Brissette”).
• Judge’s demeanor: The judge made several informal remarks, including: “Have I ever told you guys I’m never gonna trial a 9(b) case again?” and joking about what a Judge Richel would do if he heard certain arguments. He also told defense counsel to “curse less” during closing arguments.
• Emotional moments: Morris was described as crying during the trial out of fear of conviction. Cooperating witness Kent reportedly fought back tears when asked about political persecution. Cooperating witness Lynette [?] expressed fear and despair about a potential 15-year sentence.
• Defendants’ presentation: Song’s attorney described the defendants as “well-meaning social misfits.” Multiple defense attorneys characterized their clients as calm, cooperative, and non-violent at the scene. The prosecution countered that they were “cool as a cucumber” because they had practiced antifa after-action tactics.
• Prosecution tone: Several note-takers recorded the prosecution playing bodycam footage with loud gunfire audio and repeatedly invoking “ANTIFA” as an organizing framework. Note-taker RS observed the prosecution “really harps on” the Faraday bag / phones-going-dark argument.
• Defense energy: Note-taker RS described attorney Weinbel (for Sanchez) as the “most high-energy of everyone” and noted his emphasis on the absurdity of the box being treated as evidence.

Section 2: Full Notes

---

AC

12:04 A enter
Ali vs Akhtar Ali
— US

J — Jury is currently eating.
making jury charge. Worked until midnight
90-100 pgs. heavily notated w/ objections.
considering all objections. This is not the
time to make obj. that have prev. been
made. If obj. did not get addressed you
can assume it was sustained or overruled
Any obj. to transfer intent / def.

• 75 min — Government
  15 min — each defendant Up to parties to police my rulings, be
  proactive. What would J. McBride do if he
  heard that, would he sanction himself.
  Don’t go beyond the danger

ACC — Transfer of intent, cannot transfer spec. intent.
grav. of attempted murder is conduct
not harm. Gav. not result of harm.
T. intent — waters down attempt of murder.
would amount to manslaughter.
Would Manslaughter punishment or murder
punishment apply.

A — 5th circuit case Deale — Lymanah1987
p. 262 fnote 3. Judge instructed jury.
would not apply.
Cali Supreme Court — Same factual issues
Ppl vs Bland 26 Cal 4th 313 p. 328
2 1/2 cent. Distinguish b/t attempted & completed murder — defendant just intend
to kill the person. Not of others.
J — The cali court certainly sounds
compelling

PSS Doctrine is clear — does not water down
our intent. You don’t get away w/ it b/c
you accidentally, whoops, hit the —
“it’s every mans business to see… ill intentions”
You don’t get out of it just b/c you didn’t
hit what you intended to hit… You are still
liable, it’s been in our law since 1576.
J — I will consider.
A pg. 26, last ¶, that’s the mult. consp. instruction.
I think Pinkerton needs to move to
pg. 17. b/c jury might confuse w/ 1st
¶.

J Any objections

PSS No.

A didn’t hear any new evidence during trial
that would cause them to need a transferred
intent added

P — Ranger Hill testimony saying ICE agents
in the line of fire

A pg. 20 — court lays out attempted murder
5-7. varies from indictment. does not
require malice & foresight.

J Anything else new? Anyone else? Something new?

A Sommers (?) Error — pg. 15, what to call
Dep Def. vs. Dep. of War

J any object to leaving Dep. Defence (War)

A Openly confess this is not timely. Another
A pointed out — pg 10
1. Wasn’t in indictment, can’t charge
2 Const. challenge
1. To incite & inciting should not be there
inciting & promoting etc.
2. 18 USC 2102, constitutionally over broad.
amending their indictment — D’nelio (?) — p 14
2nd circ case 2012. issue of overbroad
on the statute. 972 F438 (?), 2020
J I’m not a military lawyer.
APM bottom pg. 10. promote, encourage,
and urgent. 1st amendment argument.
9th Cir Rundo 990 F3d 109 [?], p. 708, 2021
Court can say that is overbroad.

J

PSS — We don’t disagree w/ removing the language

J 2102 should be 2101

P — We agree we did not put that in the
indictment.

P9 Remove to incite a riot.
P10, 2nd element: remove “incite a riot”, add w/
the intent to organize.
3rd line — purpose of organizing

J Have I ever told you guys I’m never gonna
trial a 9 defendent (?) case again?

P Agree to take out promoting & encouraging

J final ¶ to incite a riot

A promote & encourage be removed, + urging
at 2nd line.

P term (?) to org, participate in, include
instigate. Just “urging or”

J. Does that take care of your obj.

APM yes.

A pg 4, 2nd ¶ last line. — incorrect pronoun.
J thats used several x would you like them
all changed

J We tended to use male pronouns, I’d noticed.
happy to use he/she

A Sex is included as factor to consider in
reliability of witness.

another obj. to he instead of he/she.

A pg 20 — guidance? not to argue outside
of charge. Gov. Language — 5 — correctional
off. — 1, CO — 2, A/V Law Enforcement — 1.
No way to tell in video. That 2 pple in
video are CO.
A I think rule 29 covers this. Nothing to link
name in indic. You can’t kill a
fake name.
J — I understand. I figured this would
come up.

P – G I agreement w/ ACC, 1st element
defendent(?) intended to kill w/ malice & afterthought
2.25b – “to kill w/ malice & afterthought”
we believe goes into defining “w/ m & at…”
J – step 4 and step1. Clarify.
P – makes it a crime to attempt to kill an
officer of gov. w/ malice & afterthought

P I think resolved in 1st sentence.

12:45 Resolved

P Hart test. 1st off came out (?) other 2nd.
I think its clear from their testimony.

J. reading & taking back. Gave copy to jury to
follow along w/

12:47p – BREAK – 1:38p

J. Should have copy of… for liberations..
version for liberations is w/ me.

J: Jury Instructions

• any trial – 2 judges, I and the jury.
• my duty to explain rules
  Instr. about burden of proof & procedure
  to follow with liberations. Your sworn duty
  to follow law/instructions. Do not follow
  or substitute your own… without prejudice
  or sympathy…. indictment not evidence
  of guilt. No inference drawn by def.
  choosing not to testify….

… Plea bargaining approved as lawful & proper.
Testimony may be enough to sustain as guilty.
Only use asc. testimony if you believe beyond
reasonable doubt…

• Sanchez ex 1 – English transc. included
  provided by gov. to consider
  accuracy of transcript considered –
  if you speak Spanish still use the
  gov. translation & ignore personal
  op. of translation.

Sep. charge for each considered sep. & ind.
Judge duty to decide punishment. All must
agree.

[1] Riot. 18 US, Aiding & abetting with Rioting
(1) Used any facility of int. commerce
(2) Aid/Abet commit violence for Riot
3 Overt act @ facility of int. commerce
Riot: any act violence 4 Riot
assemblage – 3 or more pple result in
damage of property or any pple
Riot: threat or threats 3+ pple ability of
immediate

to org. part. = instigate
interstate commerce – trans. b/t 2 state.

• mail
• telegraph
• telephone/radio
• television
  either during or b4 event
  use of cell phone is int. commerce
  (2) material support to terrorist
• disguise, knowing mat. used for
• mat/resources for concealment
  of offense
  (1) Attempt provide resource, conceal/disguise
  mat support or resources to terrorist
  844F, 1114, 1361
  concealment of escape
  any prop. tangible or intangible,
  $$, transportation, med. or relig. material
  not included)

tit 18,
(1) Def. intended to commit offense
(2) Act. substantial step
– strongly corroborative

Terrorist =
(1) maliciously damage/destroy prop. of
USA
(2) Any deprivation of property of USA
(3) Attempt to kill law enforcement of USA

^ must agree the D is guilty of
1 of these

No one convicted b/c of associations or beliefs
If D speech (?) made to provide mat support
or carry out concealment. 1st amendment
not protected.

Title 18 Sec 844F 1114, 1361
844F – to attempt to damage aid [?]
by means of explosives any building
of USA

(2) means of explosive
(3) Property owned/leased by USA
(4) Def acted maliciously
Explosives – gunpowder, detonating agents etc.
Property – buildings/vehicles.

1361 – injure or destroy any prop. of USA
(1) Attempted damage property
(2) Property owned by USA
(3) damage exceeds $1000
(4) Acted willfully.

(3) Consp. to use explosive to commit a felony
offense. 844m – crime to use explosive
(1) D & 1 other conspired to use explosive to
(2)
(3) Knowingly joined conspiracy.

Partnership in crime etc… Knowingly joins
scheme, even if only a minor part.

(4) Use & carry of explosives – using explosive
to commit a felony.
(1) D used an explosive to commit riot.
(2) D carried an explosive during commission of a riot.
only must prove 1, must agree on which one.

(5)-(7) Attempted murder of officer or employee of
USA
(1) D intend to kill w/ malice
(2) D did something to substantially aid.
(3) Person named is employee of USA
(4) Murder attempt was during work for
victim for USA.

(8)(9)(10) – Discharging a firearm
(1) D committed lines 5, 6, or 7.
(2)
(3) firearm discharged

• (11) 18 us code 1631
• corruptly concealing a document, record, or object to
  impair integrity.
  (1) concealed or attempt to conceal, doc, rec. object
  (2) acted knowingly
  (3) corruptly
  (4) intent to impair use in official
  proceeding. (1) conspired w/ @ least one other
  (2) D knew of purpose of conspiracy
  (3)

only for this conspiracy, not for use in
others.

2:30pm

Mere presence is not sufficient to prove
D guilty — not just a spectator.
To find

D shared criminal intent of the venture

1,2,4,5-10, Pinkerton vs USA 1946
D if member of conspiracy when
offence committed by another co-conspirator

Verdict Forms – p. 28

1. Riot: DAH, DZE, DCS, DSB, DMM, DMR, DLS, DIS
2. mat support: DAH, DZE, DCS, DSB,DMM, DMR, DLS, DIS
3. consp. explosive: DAH, DZE, DCS, DSB, DMM, DMR, DLS, DIS
4. use + carry. expl: DAH, DZE, DCS, DSB, DMM, DMR, DLS, DIS
5. att. murder: DAH, DZE, DCS, DMM, DMR,
6. ” “: DAH, DZE, DCS, DMM, DMR
7. ” “: DAH, DZE, DCS, DMM, DMR
8. dis. firearm: DAH, DZE, DCS,DMM, DMR
9. ” “:” “
10. ” “:” “
11. corruptly conceal : DES
12. : DMR, DES,

2:46pm
BREAK 3:07

CLOSING ARGUMENTS — 3:07 50min

PSB phone — “why riot? why wear BLBL,
why pay cash for legal fireworks,
why put phone in Faraday bag.
because you know apt to do something illegal
… Evidence est. fireworks burn at 1500F
… thrown @ facility, that’s malicious.
No property damaged but clearly attempted.
DMR before 2 chats. “PPL need to make own
plans”… if your intent peace why do
you need to take account of risk.
BLBL is disguise, unless you know you
cannot see or ID why so doing what.
You only know b/c of witnesses BLBL very effective
Yes, we have 2nd amendment right but
why bring something like this (plays gunfire
video) to a prison. They brought
rifles, pistols, IFACS, this is about blood,
getting shot, losing limbs, tourniquets.
That is the only purpose for those things.
Planning to get shot DCS response.
“picking good confrontation about building
momentum”. “Cops not equipped or
trained for more than one rifle (no end quote)
… DCS affinity group, he uses these
words. Not the Gov. word Group @ FSSL,
those charged w/ murder … as Suan Kent
say — DCS talking abt. freeing
political prisoners — DAH “are we
still bringing our rifles” DCS — “I’m not
going to jail” he had been training
members to do. DAH part of gear
check, laying down supressing fire …

Whats your intent? That clip had 60
rounds. Everybody knows what DCS
about. He watches video abt, teaches,
talks on Signal abt it… “Who are you
mad @ your friend or your state?”
DCS had a small group action
calling anarchist person – Hero shot
trying to burn down ICE facility.
goal always liberation, if pple pop off
blah (?) will be grounds for conspiracy” DMR
DZE — “gate 16 SEC to open / close, stays
open for 20 seconds
DMM, DZE, DMR — reasonable foreseeability
they are liable for DCS actions. Based on
knowing him very intimately. Heard about SOTO’s not knowing, but DMM, DZE,
DMR do, they know what he is capable
of. (Replays body cam of shooting).
As soon as LTG gets out of car
DCS yells “get to the rifles.” One rifle
in hand and one in the car…
He shoots until his weapons jam… Kent tells
us DCS would have kept firing.
Still jamed, still damaged. DCS planned
ambush, everyone here, except DES was
part of helping cover that up
ANTIFA, Anarchy, Communism. They use
tactics to assist in abolition of the
cops … DCS, Signal, Cloud,
OPSEC, thats all they talk abt.
Rule #1 is use Signal. Gov. lucky
in what they got from signal chat.
This is OPSEC, this is a plan. Everyone
except Baumann. Everyone leave phone @
home. Phones go dark @ FSSL

found in Faraday bag. Still pinged @ FSSL
house. DMR phone @ peace protest,
@ FSL later. Recon around the block
3x parked 1 blk from everyone
else. Phones all go dark at the same
time. Why turn phone off if what you
are doing is legal. Why wear facecoverings?
3 handwritten arrows –
historic ANTIFA symbols. DZE takes
screenshots. “Stay mobile, stay destructive.”
not “stay peaceful.” We know this group
does not like yellow jackets.
BLBL so no one can tell.
creates anonymity. Says everyone should
use it. DSB provoking provoking a riot.
Enough to say provoking a riot
Enough to say why riot…
“deblock, do it fast”
and you practice it. Another part is
debriefing in person. DCS told everyone
to put phones in a microwave, whatever
conversation happened was not recorded.
(video of deblocking)
No facemasks, cool as can be. An officer
just got shot. They take off masks.
And they as cool as cucumber. DIS doing what deblock
says to do ‘I don’t know nothing,
I didn’t see nothing”DZE has ANTIFA
tactics on phone. Everything defendant
have done are hallmarks of ANTIFA.
DAH home @ 12:52am… 45 min to
drive from Prairiland to FSSL …
What happened in that hour? We don’t
know. We do know everyone starts deleting

… b/c they know they are doing something
illegal. DZE asks — “did one of ours shoot
a cop?” DAH says stop talking, delete
post… “talk to Kells that recon ended Kris”
(Message 667 > Morph, “Need to
help these pple x2 down on OPSEC.”
785 10:19am — Kells “I’ll txt someone who
might know

• No direct connection b/t Kells + DES.
  We have DES leaving for DMR home
  for 5 1/2 hrs. During time DMR
  calls mom, to tell her to tell DES
  to comm w/ community & Kells
  Des, “I’ve contacted some of the
  homies, everyones trying to get stuff
  done.” He’s saying he’s already working
  on it… group chat getting rid of Jeff (?)
  OPSEC Des part of Real World
  OPSEC. Deleting things in Real Time
  in the real world. Where does he
  go… apt … What is he moving?
  We have no idea? DCS still on the
  run. Just had ambush at PDC
  guns? BOMBS? Hiding material is
  whats important. Hiding documents
  thats what we find. Thats what
  he’s changed w/
  … why go help DCS. B/c they are devoted
  to that guy. B/c they believed in a cause.
  Thats why everyone here July 4, DCS
  clearly the ring leader of the deal.
  (Anarchists don’t believe in leaders etc,
  but DCS clearly leader.

… Nothing illegal about hating the
government … to shoot at cop is illegal
… Attempted murder … long instruction … took an hour …
Evidence took 10 days, all
those things make no sense…
… Is it reasonably foreseeable that DCS
was going to shoot the cop
(subjection overruled)
… Reasonably foreseeable. They know who
will shoot cop. Some anarchists, some
SRA, some EGBC, all for direct militant
action. This from DSB phone EGBC,

• Formerly antifa DFW… context matters…
• What they’re talking abt is what Sanchez
  (in-audible)

---

??? (defense attorney?) * This is a big demand on yall. We all have
our role. This doesn’t happen w/o yall.
Thank you, etc… I want to set the stage
a little to … Soto … give perspective.
Attempted murder, have to find an
intent to kill w/ malice + forethought
requires very specific proof. Person for
this statute of USA. This def. has to
attempt to kill… Counts 8, 9, & 10
use/ discharge firearm… very high burden
has to be met to get to that

• count 11 – you can’t just move something,
  you have to act knowingly with specific
  attempt to impair. This a very high
  standard,
  12 “partnership in crime” has
  to be a meeting of the minds, has to
  be conspiracy to do that…

… count 3 part. in crime. That D knew and
knowingly joined

ACC – Gov. spent all this time defending labels.
Why all this about who is sleeping w/
who & messy houses. Some of you looked
surprised when defense rested. You
may say gov has piles + piles of evidence.
10 days. Diff b/t evidence + proof.
If someone sits & lies, its evidence +
not proof… You have const. duty.
ASS + OPP are not proof … its
a critique of a movie, but it looks
bad … All these lawful firearms. Gov
spent 2 full weeks telling you what to
think. DAH – she never had gun, no
part of SRA, no fingerprint, or DNA
on gun. No chats, not pics nothing
ever about guns. Nothing suggest violent
or militant. They want to show you
satanic Death Cult … They keep
showing video unknown women
shooting AR … discussion + news chat
says nothing abt ambush. People
trying to bring temperature down…
Not one 4th of July chat. ‘Hot girl noise demo’.
No evidence DAH knew
abt anything. Gov may say what about
chat not seen etc … DAH & ANTIFA,
only Mr Smith & John Thomas ID, but
only when Gov tells him to … They
asked him to list off ANTIFA members
and he gives a blank stare. Gov.

tells him to look at list written by
FBI. They tell him, what abt DAH,
& he says yes. You can’t use Smith
testimony … He was lying from beginning,
blamed it on Seth Sykes … Bauman
did not know DAH…
picked up trash and ran left

AB (DZE) 4:20pm
Firework on 4th of July. Noise, lights, and message
of hope to foreigners who reside on our land an act of love.
Until Bauman vandalism + DCS reacts to cop drawing
gun on back of D – Did gov prove
each element. Sep for Zack Everetts…
As to Zack… actual plan to go
off to Noise Demo exercising right to assembly and
free speech. Riot 3+ pple to destroy,
not impulsive or act of 1 or 2 people.
Evidence – Bauman vandalizes
without plan or seeking approach…
Right after we see Bauman walking towards
ICE van, that has tires slashed.
Bauman blames Sikes, until he agrees
to corporate, then changes story to
blame DZE … because more def as he
gets more meetings with feds.
poss DZE 1st to leave…
none use ANTIFA about self…
we saw how they react…
we saw Seth military yes sir no sir,
Lynettes fear and despair…
Susan Kent fighting back tears…
Reasonable doubt …
Pros also relies on “Propaganda”, all lawful
and protected by constitution.

… Why is DCS the only one w/ weapon in
hand? Why not shoot @ employees. No better
time to ambush? … Behavior of everyone
except Bauman + perhaps DCS was
peaceful …

---

4:35pm DCS
APH Ty for being here etc … Mr Smith told pretty
good story. You can only say “cmon, you know”
so many times. What happened on July 4
was a tragedy…
… Not a very (?) stealth mission…
… No call to arms until LTG came out…
You understand, how someone who cared
abt ind. could be concerned
… sometimes cops do the wrong thing”
Tried to create situation where person w/
a gun might dirk (?) etc.
exh. 23 – (Video of gunfire)
Initial shots one sec or less.
exh. 10 … That rifle shooting into the
ground. How can in less than 1 sec you go
from shooting @ ground to attempt
to harm ind … Sharp never heard bullets
wizz by … because LTG bullet in side of
gun, DCS gun wasn’t pointed at
LTG when bullet hit.
Ranger Hill, says shooting in back good shoot.
… Signal defensive, never offensive …
DCS was a yellow vest several times.
If we have a right, + we can’t use it
its really not much of a right is it.

4:50 – 5:00
① Stop 4 day
② Have to brake 6:00 – 6:30, would be done 7:50ish
③ Or go till 6, come back tomorrow.

5:30 – DOORS LOCKED
— 5:10 Return

DSB

AJS -DMM – 1st of all I thank & honor you all for
being attend etc. Pittman my friend,
today he is judge I am atty. Not read
entire charge. pg 17 mere presence
@ scene of event or mere fact
may have associated w/ each other
does not prove conspiracy. She’s not a
con conspiritor to anything. She went
to ALV. She stayed in the van.
(shows photo of van) Gov will
never prove because they can’t. There
was a cht on July 3 about bring
your gun. My client not in that chat.
She drove pple. Its not a prison btw
its a pre-trial detention center
for ICE… Picture from the back
going down the road… Happens after
the shooting … pic by cop, my client
in the van, some guns in car that
are hers, vests hers. How is she guilty
when never left the car. Vandalism
not guilty, slashed tires, not guilty.
Gov hasn’t proved anything except
she was there. Had BLBL, but no covering.
How did she leave so fast?
Because she was in the van.
Something in her heart told her not to get out
of the van. When she saw PD she

cussed b/c how “fucking pissed” off she
was that a cop was shot.
(pic – back of van w/ frosted windows
from AC being on)
She tells the truth then gets to
J. County jail + is terrified. All
ya’ll took an oath to do the right thing
I know client will be found
not guilty b/c she.

DMR – AM, mat. support to terrorist charge – law req knowledge +
intent
Doc. Consp – Evidence shows DES went to
DMR home b/f she even spoke to him. And
box contained nothing that related to
July 4. Charge says evidence must be
related to July 4 event.
Gov wants to turn this into evidence
of terrorism. Owning copy of “X” doesn’t
make you nazi/communist. Did not
show any behavior consistent with
those ideologies.

5:45 Burns (?) – DLS
Gov. investigated personal life. Turned over
every stone. All they can prove 1) She
was @ protest 2) She has a book
club that the government hates.
Gov said twitter of Antifa DFW rebranded
as Emma Goldman booklist.
printing press etc. as evidence… Gov
kept machines b/c they hate what gets
printed at Soto house. Why was she here
that day? in signal let her husband

talking about protest. He was fired up,
he wanted to go + she went w/ him.
She’s not in any chats, gear chats,
gun groups + she arrived late to the
protest… They had no idea someone
was shot… They weren’t wearing a mask.
If you wear a mask you are BLBL + ANTIFA

• if you don’t wear a mask you are BLBL
• ANTIFA. They are labeling protestors
  as terrorists + you are the only people
  who can stop that from happening.

5:50PM – BREAK 6:30

ALD – DIS
You’ve heard lots of evidence. Sure you
agree he has diff. political + social
ideas than many pple. Often expressed
thru EGBC, often @ Finns place…
search warrant for evidence of
mass production of prop. Print of sister
with carrier (?) was side hustle.
None of zines are illegal. Big
pile of scary guns blah (?) also not illegal.
Know from Sharp, he embraces
anarchist ideology – pple taking
care of each other w/o government.
What DIS not in – not in any
of the chats talking abt noise
demo @ PDC. Not @ gear check
or affinity group. DSB didn’t
know anything. DCS expressed regret
got caught up in this. Only 3 ppl

shot fireworks – guards came out.
He left like most. Guns in car, not
in SRA. Sikes said not a gun guy.
Everyone already there, they were late.
“cool as a cucumber” b/c
they haven’t done anything. Too far
away after gunshots.
Is it a riot if no-one notices?
Guards didn’t see
fireworks, no damage, no one tried to
break in. Bauman – outsider of
group, kickes in brake lights + slashes tires.
DIS not involved, no plan for
violence. Count 2 – mat support for
terrorism – What did DIS provide?
Nothing. Gov has made much
of IFAKS, daytime protestor also had
IFAK. Question: just of how extensive
IFAK kit is. Don’t be misled – part
when gov says… No evidence DIS
shot off fireworks. What agreement did
he reach to participate in this?
He arrives late… you heard DIS
had 1 pistol in car, 0 in home +
pics of guns on phone. Why? Maybe
to make you forget he only had 7…
Enemies in yellow, Discussion
for next day, ya’ll know what expect
is? Out of town… leaves you (?) to
cover up mess. According to exp. DIS
in affinity group, no witness has
said. Gov says ANTIFA, United Front
I thought this “united way”
EGBC above ground ANTIFA org.

not supported by any testimony in
court. He wanted you to believe
that DIS controlled all the accounts
A talked about ANTIFA DFW b/c EGBC.
3 of chats my client was not even
in. Evidence client didn’t commit 1, 3, 4
Who are the victims in 5, 6, 7?
Not named in indictment.

DDSE
gov has to prove a crime truth is
simpler than they want you to believe
not any violence

• on trial for carrying a box +
  moving a box
  Only connection is to apt, where
  no one at apt was arrested.

We’re gonna make what he has evidence.
They have phone call + suspected was bomb
Timeline does not support gov.

Noone been arrested for a wide right
turn ever.
They grabbed guns, PC’s, etc from
2 people they did not arrest.
They’ve taken item from someone
not involved
They broke doors + windows
confiscated as much as they could.
Did they use
2 Journals from parents
Love letter from 2017
Text from 2022
Everything in box from 2022 or earlier

they don’t ever show you the box.
They hid it behind nast (?).
Heard DMM in/out of van
DMR in 5ft nothing – which figure
is her? Why b/c they want
you to be confused. What had
as evidence he concealed, for
DMR. Everything in this box was
his. He didn’t tell because he didn’t
want to be involved.
(shows box documents, notes, school
doc)

If he moves his own stuff he’s
not guilty. If they get up now
they will try to change story.
They change their answer. Gov pushes
witnesses to fit narrative that
doesn’t exist. They want to prove
that moving a box that he owns
is a crime. This should have been
a murder trial for 1 person. Weapons
expert showed… etc… I don’t know
how any expert helps. Listen to
phone call – sure she gave a 64 year old
woman ANTIFA instructions
His already gone from house before info
relayed. 2nd call – wife
calling husband to take of house
“tow the car is now ANTIFA for evidence”
(Goes over timeline).
These actions they complain abt
ridiculous. He didn’t even go to
the car. They say house here, car

page 25

here, house here etc. None of
this illegal to have. I don’t know
what any of this has to do w/
them being guilty or not ( shows piles guns)
after they got box, none
of the evidence was used to get
DMR. I find it very telling…
I ask agent abt pos. of this letter
from hip hop class, I asked who…
I assumed all the hell the way up to
here… (J – curse less) … tried to
apply labels & they tried to obscure.
Nothing used to process DMR. Return
verdict of not guilty.
“favorite instrument of tyranny”

6:50PM
PSS

• “Except 4 Sanchez he wasn’t there.”

Sanchez & phone call – “I contacted some of
the homies, getting done.” Questions why so vague. No names etc. Talking in
front kids reference.
PSS says A said they didn’t meet
til 2023.
What did he do for 5 1/2 hours? Feed
bunnies? That doesn’t take 5 1/2
hrs? Your wife is in jail & all
you can do is take an insignificant box
to Denton. He is vague in back of
cop car. Acts surprised wife’s
terrorism charges. Cop “what are
you doing here?” – just visiting
friends. Box had EGBC.

Look how clean DMR house is?
He cleaned it out. He’s there 5 1/2 hours
they create group chat. She tells him
where car parked. 2400 Blk, why doesn’t
want to say address? b/c they staged
there. The “person I’m in contact w/”
“I don’t have a key” “TOW IT”
“Phone is in back… etc.” Do what
you need to do.

A objects to PSS saying they said
they met in 2023, but love letter
from 2017. A says they never said.
Judge overrules.

Peaceful Protest

@ this time all evidence b/4 you.
Almost 7:30, I suggest, decide on time to
come back tomorrow.
52 & 53 – Alt. jurors – released

---

CE

“video + audio muted on request of the court”
finally got view at 11:30am
Journalists e NY Times, AP, + the Intercept there
along c e broke [?] elected attorney. Pittman entered
at 12:05p. Front tables are all covered. Def.
Attorney introduced themselves. All 9 defend there
but not jurors: still out to lunch. Last nite a this
morning indictment deliberation
Ct/15 512 pg dict. description of charges, incl. any
motions or objections, affirmed. Any objections or
requests not yet made, state now on any corrections
to make? Pros gets 75 min, def attys ea get 15 min.
“This is how u need to structure yer arguments
around the stated charges” he wrote def’s memo
Attn transferred:
Attrn re: attempt “intent is to caused harm”

• nots not proven so intent is not applicable.

Attrn re: whether or not (in transferred intent) cited
cases, ex. People vs Bland in CA, have to distinguish [?]
between intended murder vs completed murder

• distinguish between.
  Attorney: intent to kill — difference between attempt
  but hit wrong person, and attempt to kill as
  criminal conduct regardless of whether or not
  attempt is achieved.
  Attorney: a multiple conspiracy instruction needs to
  be modified
  Clayton: heard he new instruction in regard — covered
  yesterday
  Koffer: new obj., attempted murder counts 5-1 but is
  not included in presented charge.

Re: Scrivners Error, re: Sec Hegseth Dept of Defense/War
Re: pg 10: 2 issues not in indictment so shouldn’t be in
charge “to incite or inciting” “Whether or not
(issue 3) is constitutionally overbroad” “Military distinction”
Attorney: “in this situation,” “incite” will be removed.
“urging to incite + riot” (removed)

Dr Gatto: will remove incite on pg 9, + p.10 defendant did

“defendant did so with intent to incite a
riot” removed in several places, also rid of
“promoting” or “encouraging” or “participating in a riot”

• “organizing + instigating” a riot.
  Attrny Gatto: re: reference to murder outside the
  indictment. Attny Mr Cofer/Kofea:
  Correctional officers #1, #2, #3
  there was no way to id. those officers. As “pseudo-
  nyms” (#1, 2, 3), there is no evidence to who those
  refer to.

Back to Gatto: Re: with start “to kill with malice
afterthought.” (Intent to kill an police officer) will be
deleted. Response to officer to come out to
event. He’ll think it over + get back. All other
objections accepted. It’ll take about 30 min.
Pitt. stopped court at 12:45p. To consider + take a
break.

Judge back at 1:38p
Jury instructions: 2 judges: judge + jury
P decides what happens. Jury has to decide burden of proof
— beyond a reasonable doubt [?]

2. Pros — while following correct procedures.
   Law is not required to provide evidence or proof.
   Proof beyond reasonable doubt is what to be deliberation
   determination of facts.
   Lawyers present evidence to defend their cases/
   Do not consider any evidence that is not legally admissable.
   Can draw reasonable inferences from evidence, testimony,
   proof of chain of evidence, etc
   It is yer job to assess credibility, + the weight given to
   witness testimony. Assess is the witness honest? See + hear
   evidence from testimony? Don’t assume evidence based on # of witnesses, traits of character, credibility of evidence given
   in testimony + the gvt caused some “co-conspir’s”. Proceed
   c caution + clarity. Determining facts/conclusions. Judge
   testimony + objectivity + the weight.
   Whether the transcript correctly or incorrectly is secondary to
   what you hear on tape. Accuracy of recording is ok when
   in English (as per Deo). As re: intent to harm 3rd party…..
   In the event a def is found guilty, it is up to judge to determine
   that. Assess evidence to as presented in court. Can change
   your mind. Have to assess unanimously whether Pros has
   presented enough evidence to decide conclusion. Charge. Judge
   determines final verdict.
   aiding + abbetting providing a ride to those involved in violence

defendant acted in acts of violence + 3 or more persons
to cause harm to property or persons
Acts of violence would result in damage to persons/property
to further (a riot or violence)
interstate commerce (or state lines) incl. transporting
someone or to use of phone, financial support to
terrorists. Material support (incl. vehicles/transport)
or resources (incl. change of appearance) also “monetary support,
explosives, medicine — are entitl “material support or
resources to terrorists.” P: “defendant did use such
MS + RT, also use of (MS + RT) by defendant (2) Attempt
by defendant (intent to shoot/harm/willfully injured or “intended
to kill any person or property.”
“Constitutionally-protected speech” can be used to show
MS + RT, to carry out an event (+ malicious attempt to damage

• destroy property” leased to or own by a govt entity.
  Explosives incl. (a long list of gun components + gunpowder
  mixtures). Depts affected: all govt agencies. Maliciously
  means behavior toward property [?] “the United States” but does
  not mean perpetrator knew the property was of the U.S.
  Did defendant conspire to carry firearms + other defendants
• did plan or scheme + others in order to carry out an act.
  Pros does not have to prove proof of existence of
  conspiracy. Ct 3 of indict: Defend intended to carry explosive
  to incite a riot or conspired to carry exp in commission of
  a riot or to commit a felony. Used explosives in commission
  of the offence or riot. Must decide if firearm was carried
  at the same time as a felony offence (not necess used).
  5 [?] without [?]
  gm ct: proof + reasonable doubt that firearms were used
  in commission of felony incl. attempt to kill officer of the law.

“As Go Corona gets out of his car” (P says “this was Song’s plan,”)

• an AR in one hand + another arm on another AR. Until weapon
  jammed. “Song planned an ambush” + told bus Sanchez “helped
  him cover it up.” Pros. Sgt Song pulled gun on Grosso as Grosso [?]
  got out of car instead of other way around. Sgt Baumann was the
  only innocent one (he was a plant). Talk about phones going
  “dark” at about the same time. “Why are you wearing face
  coverings at 10:00 at nite? Because u know yer about to do
  something illegal.” “Event was screen-shotting def. in black
  block.” Ms Batten, “why riot”? P says means, “I don’t want to
  talk about that here.” (covering up). “Strategy + the attire”:
  “You bloc and debloc quickly” to chg clothes. “Song told the
  others to put their phones in a microwave to hide evidence.
  When a passing officer asks what they’re doing,” Ines said
  we’re out for a walk” + that’s “black bloc” + antifa” instructions
  “for debloc’ing.” “Why delete chats “why cover them up? Because
  they know they’re doing something illegal.”

“Now about Sanchez: chats from Kells + Morph about strategies
Kells: “I’ll text someone who might know”. Sanchez went
home. Rueda called her mom, + said “tell Danny to
communicate + Kens + the Community.” Kells = Krickey, Morph =
Morpheus
Now, “Song is on the run, for 2 days now”. “And Sanchez
is in touch with the Community + is moving stuff.” “Song wasn’t
arrested until 11 days later.” “That’s a lot of work.” “these guys
were devoted to him; they believed in Song. He’s clearly the
ringleader of this group.” Ct 3 + 4: “conspiracy to use + Using
explosives”: Evetts bet + each to cover up illegality of intent.
He (P) says that’s all a conspiracy to commit murder.” A black flag +
red on top — that’s anarchist/communist? It’s Antifa/Anarchist.”

“To kill with malice of the thought” is a malice of the front thought [?]
Cts 8,9,10 have to do 2 violating firearm law during crime
Cts 5,6, 7 attempted to kills officers of the court

To prove that firearm use was intended to further crime of violence
it is not just being carried in a car

Ct 11: Corruptly concealing a Def concealed a document 2 intent
to impair its integrity of doc to subvert course of justice.

Ct 12: Corrupt or conceal a document used to conceal a conspiracy.
If you find a def wasn’t part of conspiracy, that jury has to
find innocent on that count.

Ct for Presence at a crime must be proven to include
participation in a crime. To associate in a criminal venture, pros
must prove “sharing intent of the ‘principle’.” It is not just being there.
Has to be a conspiracy 2 conceivable awareness of a
possible outcome.

Verdict Forms of the Jury:
we the go thru each defendant
jury for Ct 1 – enter guilty or not guilty by unanimous decision

• all counts
  thru all defendants found.

Count 2 “Providing material support for Terrorism” go thru each defendant:
we the jury find deter guilty or not guilty of Count #2 of the
superceding indictment.

Go thru each indictment . . . .

Ct 4: “use + carry of explosives”

Count 5: “Attempt to murder officers of the U.S.”

6: Attempted murder of Attempt to murder other employees of the US
7:26 7. Attempt to murder an employee of the U.S.

Addl
8.

” 8. Discharge of f/a firearm during a crime of violence
” 9. Discharge of firearm of ” ” ” “
DLC
” 10. DLC a f/a anywhere near a crime of violence.”
DLC
discharge 11. Corruptly concealing a f/a or other material for a Ct V
f/a/firearm 12. Specifically. Des about concealing documents

Signed 2:47 by Judge 10 min break resumed 3:10

2:10
Pros: Savanna hare middle name 2 H? ask Cyn+h
re phone, she wrote:

Why riot? Why fireworks? why put phone in Faraday bag?

Prairielands a Prison – to burn at 1500°F + that’s
malicious Property, doesn’t have to be damaged but
there was an intent to damage.

Marjorie: why take (risks)? Her talk blk blk bc as “a disguise”
that changed from original
to hide who + where you are. Play recording of gunfire
“why bring f/a’s to a protest peaceful unless you’re worried about getting shot”
“we know that Song wanted to cause steal a conflict”

“Are they going to slash tires? That’s what Song does.”

“Song’s affinity group” was centered (Morris+Hill) Claims Song was
using the others (to achieve his goals). Thurs chat sessions Plays
video about “layering shit stuff” suppressive fire” you’re not trying
to (be peaceful). Sez Rueda + Morris chat on Signal question shit.
“An anarchist hero who was shot for burning down an ICE
facility”. Pros sez Song idealized sed “hero”. “A gate is open
for 30 sec.” P sez evidence for (plan to free) and dream to start
a confrontation. Rueda, Arnold + Morris are culpable as they
shared the “dream” + (backed it). Plays more video (we hear
audio only).

Pitts
P sez grp” changed their name
Pros — from Antifa DFW to Emma
Goldman Bookclub” — incorrect if
P: not outright lie.

“Material support includes you, your body”
“These fireworks are explosives.”

“Is there reasonable (guilt;) -?
Objection: “conspiracy” or
Judge: overri ruled.

“All this evidence is evidence of state of mind”
Fireworks, 1366 SRA, all indicate militant . . .”
“Walking as if no cop had been shot . . . context matters”.
end. pros 3:58p

Now Def Attorneys. “Mr. Hays?” you’re up.”

Def. for Ines: “to kill intentionally 2 specific intent” — “It’s a
very high burden. “Have to find that firearm was carried + fired.”
Ct 11+12 i re: Sanchez “you can’t just move somethings + there needs
to be shown a conspiracy to conceal “2 knowledge + “taking a
step” to conceal.” Have to find that there was an agreement”
to conspire + conceal.

Ct. 1: “to riot” has to have used “interstate commerce” + “has to
incl. “acts of violence.” Have to do something to help along
the commission (material support) of a crime.

Judge: “Def attorn. have agreed to a roundrobin of statements, mr.
, you go 1st.”

Autumn’s
lawyer: “evidence is not proof”. “Assumptions + opinions
are not proof.” Lots of evidence does not = proof.
Pros has spent wks telling you (jury) what to think +
what to believe. Prosec. showed video of 2 shooting
at a gun range; of Signal chat messages; + Lucy’s [?]
journal (diary?), that’s “evidence” but not proof.
They want you to presume, + fill in the gaps, to
convince you to side with the govt. John Thomas
followed Mr. Smith’s instructions; reading off list that
govt. gave him, to name members of SRA. As did Seth
Sikes. “Autumn had nothing to do 2 planning ambush or
carrying guns, the Seth did carry guns.” Fireworks:
(off-screen) each frame is a firework that did not cross the
fence (none intended to). Autumn was not a part of “what
fireworks or guns.

P.i.m [?] Boufford: A cry of hope (f/ the inmates). Seth did the
Zack vandalism. Gross stepped out of car, gun drawn. If gvt
Everts has not proven any charge beyond reasonable doubt,
lawyer that’s not proof. Did the gvt prove a riot? A riot is not
an
Nathan Baumann came alone 2 spray paint cans. Did the
gvt prove that I [?] was not the only vandal. Baumann
claimed that Sikes was involved 2 vandal. He later
admitted that Sikes was not involved. So is a reasonable
to expected [?] that Everts was 2 them? No evidence to support
that. Who are the terrorists? Govt sez they all are. All
5 cooperators, knew to recite the gov’s orders. Thomas +
Baumann were the only ones to recite entirely the govt’s
story. All the zines have 1 thing in common: “the govt doesn’t
like them.” But all are constitutionally protected.

So
shooting only + Sgt Gross has drew his gun + aimed
at someone’s back. Instances of reasonable doubt (also)
gvt sez attempted 3 murders + claimed Sikes did
vandalism + that Everts slashed tires, when Baumann
did both. Baumann is govt’s (legal)(weapon against def)

Attny for Song: Hayes: very soft-spoken
“The 1st person that day to draw + aim a f/a was Sgt. Gross”
1st person there in shiny (fluorescent) vest, at loading d water.
“The reason for reason bringing a f/a was to keep ourselves safe,”
to defend others and discourage violence.

The 2nd (Song) saw the gun drawn, he intended to suppress
(Gross’s) gunfire. “Go to ground” Initial volley of fire took
15 sec.” “1st volley was aiming into the ground. The physical
evidence doesn’t match up 2 anything.” Bruise + (Gross): “that
was a ricochet bullet.” Ranger (Hill) mentioned bullets in the
ground but didn’t take any photos of it. Seth Sikes sed all his
life he felt marginalized + bullied.” When picked up by police,
Sikes cited panic + fear when he was interrogated. How
testimony of Pros. was full of data, details but short on evidence.
2nd Amend, rite to have guns. If govt won’t let you use that
right, then its not much of a right. Judge cut off Hayes at
4:50 p. Saying attorneys/jurors? can choose to take break

• come back, or to call it a day

5:07 Another break. Decision was to continue.

Next def atty:

Chris
Tapper Savanna’s map was for her planning a NoKings Rally. 295
photos on her phone. Of those, were there any photos
that connected her to a planned ambush? The only
thing govt shot it could use was a photo at EGBC.
14 people there [?], 3 of whom in ctrm. This was a search
of the Soto’s Subaru, in it, they found Savannas ID cards +
phone. On July 3, Sav was at home + stayed there til
8:30pm on July 4, to work at Panera Bread, then went
home. Soto picked her up there. Testimony was that fireworks
were 50-100 yds away from detention center. Savanna
was there for 4th of July fireworks + noise demo. This
is a trial in a trial. Pitts jury instructed you (jury)
must have separate consideration for each defendant.
“Only 4 cts apply to Ms Barken, + if none apply, you
must acquit (this) defendant.”

Closing cl Megan Morris: “A conspiracy that does not have letters,
emails does not have co-conspirators.” Morris was not on
St. John (chat). “PL isn’t a prison, BTW, it’s a pre-trial detention”
center. She never got out of her van. How can she be
part of a conspiracy (token) she didn’t participate? She
never got out of her van, so could not have done
spray-painting or other claims. Did she wear black blc
(yes, in her van). She called Sheriff, who called Rangers.
Marquetta Clayton for Maricela: want to PL to do a noise demo. Only
thing in her hands was a megaphone. Ct 1: it’s a riot. But
to be a riot, there has to be intent to commit violence.
No one said they’d planned a riot — that was never the plan.
By the time Gross got there, he only saw a couple of people.

Clayton: everyone ran. Officer “Metro” said he expected to get
a lot of fireworks calls on 4th of July. Asked other [unclear: officers],
reports + [unclear: calls] No. Did anyone call in to report explosives? Anyone
No. [unclear: Rpt] Fireworks were by the treeline, 50-100 yards
away. “The document conspiracy”: none of the zines had
anything to do 2 PL. Nothing illegal found in Mari’s home.
“Owning a copy of Mein Kampf (or the Capitol) does not make
you a Nazi (or a Communist) unless you show you are by your
actions or intentions). So does having anti-fascist ideology
make you terrorist? No it doesn’t. Did she plan violence,
or use explosives or vandalize property, or carry a gun? No,
she did not. “Just because the pros believes something
doesn’t make it true.”

Young guy for Liz Soto: Pros o.d. NTX Antifa rebranded itself as
Burns EGBC. That was from a Twitter acct. EGBC was started in 2014.
They confiscated the printing press as evidence. “There
is nothing incriminating about a machine. Its the
literature the govt objects to. In a Signal chat Lmez [?]
wants to do the noise demo (“let’s fun”). He didn’t tell
Liz she had to go, she went to (have fun too).
Detention guards told them to leave. She left (2
times: Savanna), + Gross showed up. They had no
way to know what happened, may have heard
shots, but had no idea a shooting had happened. “Govt.
is asking you (jury) to put protesters in prison as terrorists.”

5:58 Another break. Judge left SSSP.
Back in session 6:28p. Judge left 5:55 pm

Mr. Davis for Ince: he had different ideas from his army. Search warrant
served on him for “mass production of propaganda.” But that’s not
illegal. He embraces an anarchist philosophy. Mr Davis had never
heard of anarchy + this. He’s not in an affinity group. He’d expressed
regrets “getting involved.” He didn’t shoot fireworks. Only 3 people
shot fireworks. “When guards came out, he left, + any shots were
fired.” He + Liz + vanished [?] done nothing wrong. There was no damage to bldg.
“2 people, on their own, go to parking lot” (one was Nathan Bauman) to do —
“There was no plan for violence” (that Ince had heard of). “Nathan did not
recall Ince Soto until Pros “led him to [unclear: him].” SRA, antifa, EGBC are all
above ground. Antifa could not have preceded EGBC due to timeline.
There’s no evidence of Cts 1-4 + other causes. Who is officer #1, #3, etc (no names).

Chris Wizner [?] for Des: he’s on trial for 2 things, “carrying
a box + conspiracy to carry a box.” Arrested purely on
a phone call.” Timeline does not support a conspiracy.” No one
gets arrested for making a wide right turn.” Police confiscated
a lot of stuff belonging to 2 other unnamed people, as well as
[unclear: Jol] Des’ whats in the box that was confiscated? It was never
revealed. “I don’t know what’s in the box.” Manny didn’t know
opened, there’s a paper from elementary school, movie reviews
6pm Re: Pros: Reminding cooperators of things they’re supposed to
remember (fed by govt.). Convos between Des + Mari. Something
about antifa (he keeps stepping away fr/microphone). “Look at the
evidence. Which one says Antifa?” — None of them. “Let’s look at
their last day.” Way away fr/mic. (Admonished for Amarangi [?] by P. “Rtn a verdict
of not guilty because they’ve been telling you what to think) + that’s wrong.”

Paul-header [?] not Smith
Prosecution last words: “Don’t leave behind
your reason + common sense.” Part of a conspiracy
to commit a crime consists of whole pkg; you can’t say
I didn’t do that or someone else did that… taken in
whole makes it a conspiracy. (Really?) All of them were
in black blc + masks. Claims Song yelled “Get to the
rifles.” + Gross had a foot on the ground. Someone
wore pants + kneepads. “I contacted some of the homes
the people were come across.” Pros say that’s code
for secret message. “Took 5½ hrs to (search Des’s
home)” while his wife is in jail.” (Fake Scorn/amaze-
ment) “and what does he do? Removes an
‘insignificant box.’” “My car is parked at….”
(supposed to be Liz) — “who talks like that?”
Des asks what to do about it + Liz, in prose’s
deep ominous voice, shouts, “Tow it.” Pitt
stops to admonish someone in gallery. Pros.
continues, “rifle, firearm, trauma, + facts” +
repeats “Trauma, + facts.” Someone says there’s
a plant among them (Pros say, who would
say that unless they’re guilty). “Why does
Hill say, “Don’t speak of things you know
nothing about” unless she’s aware of guilt.
“Callous disregard” is malicious conduct.
About the binary trigger. Morris + Hill stayed
in the chat, evidence that they knew what Song
was doing, they’re culpable. Pros blames Song
for staying to clear the rifle. If cleared, he would’ve killed someone.

that was Mr. “Gunthell”.

It’s already 7:22 pm. Jurors #52 + 53
are alternative jurors, you can leave
now but are not released from
procedural requirements, + can be
called back.

---

ES

3/11/2026 AM

[margin note: “Evidence” was wheeled by to the jury room.]

Judge says there are 88 seats in Dallas.
Several members of the family do not have
seats. Multiple members of the press have asked
for special seating. Search your conscience if
you can go to Dallas. Love your neighbor
as thyself. The right/moral thing to do might
be let a family member take your seat.

[margin note: Judge shifts blame for his decision to move the trial to a smaller courtroom.]

2 hours before closing arguments
1 hour to read charges

Charging documents are being distributed
Attorneys will have 30 minutes to read it +
they’ll do a pulse check on where they are at

11:50 10 more minutes to read the charges + bring
the defendants to the courtroom

US vs Cameron Arnold et al

Shawn Smith
Lawyer Introductions

Attorneys + Defendants are present
Worked on charge until midnight + then
again this morning. 90-100 pages
of submissions + objections. The copy provided
is a result of all this work. This is not the

time to bring up objections that have already
been submitted. You can assume what’s been
overruled or sustained.

Mr. Gato’s motion has be considered + added
into the charging papers. Wants to know if
there are additional

Victims of attempted murder are still using
a pseudonym

15 minutes for each defense attorney

Attorneys will have a free hand in this
part of the trial. They must be proactive.

Your arguments must fall in line
w/ the

Motion – Transfer of Intent
Objection Cofer- Attempted require intent. Specific intent
cannot be transferred.

• Not a result of harm
• If it waters down the charge of murder,
  if it transfers it would be watered down to
  manslaughter
  Objection McClan- Two cases 5th circuit court Delarosa v.
  Lenough (1987) P262 Footnote 3 –
• Supreme Court CA deals w/ same
  People v Bland 26 Cal 4th 313 P 328
• We should also distinguish between murder +
  attempted murder. They must have intent to
  kill the victim not another person.
  Judge: Second case sounds very compelling

Mr. Gato

• doesn’t water down
• shows intent to kill (still has the
• 1576 case “it’s every man’s business to
  foresee . . . .”
• if you make a mistake and hit an unintended
  target, you are still liable

Other issue in charges
Mr. Gato

• P26 – multiple conspiracy instruction/
  Pinkerton – suggests that he move the
  sections about conspiracies to another
  place

A M Clayton – no new information came out
in the trial that allows them to present
the transfer of intent argument

A Cofer

• P20 – attempted murder counts 5-7, it
  varies from the indictment

A McClain

• Scribner’s errors, P15 military law
• Unclear what to call Department of Defense
  vs. Department of War – debate
  who can change the name of that department
• Riot D18 – should not be in charge
  “to incite” + “inciting” are not in the
  indictment
• A8USD2102 – constitutionally overbread
• D’Amelio 683F412 2nd circuit case (2012)
• defts court to Miseles 972F3518
  P 542 4th circuit case (2020)

Gato agrees to remove inciting (P5?)

• “promote encourage + urging” – should
  not be included / unconstitutional /
  1st Amendment argument
• 9th circuit (2021) – overbroad +
  punish constitutionally permitted
  speech + criminal speech
  Gato agrees to remove “to incite a riot” (P9),
  “in inciting,” D10 “intent to incite a riot”
  → intent to organize a riot, etc.
  Gato agrees to remove “promoting + encouraging”
  Gato agrees to remove “urging”

Re: Attempted murder – things included that were outside of the indictment
A Cofer confers w/ Gato
Judge – used male pronouns but considered
using he/she
A Cofer – Factors to consider – take it up
with the 5th
A St. John – Morris would prefer he/she pronouns

A2 for Morris (Pursett)
Judge: Star Telegram sure liked Miles Bursett/Purcett
A2 for Morris

• P20 – Guidance not to argue outside of the charge
• Correctional Officers – count 5 + count 6
  were not identified in videos
• Rule 29 – no pseudonyms have been linked
  to the real names of the victims

Gato responds to Cofer

• “to attempt to kill w/ malice afterthought”
• 2.52B malice
• believes that should go in on P20
• appears on element 2 + 4 – adding it
  in the first paragraph is sufficient (Gato)

Gato responds to Purcett

• Harp testified she came out first +
  Rudie came out second so correctional
  officer
• 30 minute break for printing + edits
• You have time to drive to Dallas
  will take break after this

During break all family + friends
(non-law enforcement) were asked
to leave the courtroom. Likely caused by
complaints from reports who did not

;’
Fit in the courtroom. Seats were shuffled.
Reporters got spaces and others lost their seat.
Others shuffled around. There are currently
6 journalists and Nathan Baumann’s attorney
occupying spaces. And 1/3 of the courtroom
is reserved for law enforcement.

---

Jury enters
Jury receives jury instructions, copy
of charges

Judge reads jury instructions

• Indictment is not evidence of guilt
• Innocence until proven guilty
• Determine the facts using evidence presented during the case
• Specific instructions re: witnesses
• must consider all English transcripts provided so all consider the same evidence — may not use the Spanish transcript directly to interpret the translation differently
• should consider each defendant individually
• should not be concerned w/ the punishment
• must be unanimous for each charge for each person

Reviews 2nd superceding indictment

• use of a cellphone counts as interstate commerce
• conspiracy to carry explosives
• carry explosive during a felony
• counts – 7 – attempted murder
• count 11 – corrupting, concealing a record/document

Shows/reads jury verdict form

ex. We the jury, find the defendant __ as
to count 1 of the 2nd superceding indictment

Jury will decide the foreman who will sign the verdict form.

Break – will hear the government’s closing
arguments promptly at 3

50 minutes + 25

Davis will do introductions in 9 minutes, then
2 minutes

Savanna has no h

---

US Gov begins closing arguments

• Why Riot?
• Why wear black bloc?
• Why pay cash?
• Why put phone in faraday bag?
• Because you know you’re about to do something illegal
• Light fireworks at a prison at 10 at night on

private property

• throw fireworks at windows, facilities, fences
• Do not need to destroy property to attempt + to destroy property
• Mari was in 2 chats
• Why hide if your intention is to be peaceful?
• why use black bloc?
• They couldn’t see them. It was effective.
• You are sure couldn’t identify what people were doing.
• “Hey, black bloc works, it provides complete anonymity”
• Shows gun firing range practice
• why did you bring that to a prison?
• No evidence of counter protestors
• IFAK is about blood, gunshot wounds, that is the only purpose for these things
• We know Song wanted to
  Signal chats: What are we going to do? Slash tires thats what he did Song’s plan to build a confrontation “Cops are not trained for two weapons” Song’s affinity group (56th St residence) Morris + Hill → charged with murder
• 4th party — Song Evetts Rueda Morris
• Song suggests breaking them out
• discounted by the group
• Song said 3x “I’m not going to jail”
• Song had been training his group to do
• Hill is part of gear check
• Song teaches suppressive fire
• What’s your intent? To scare, to scare someone off — you’re trying to kill
• He shows videos about it, he teaches about it, and sends signal chats about it
• Rueda/Hill discuss affinity groups — debating individual choice w/in the group
• Song idolized an anarchist hero trying to burn down an ICE facility
• mal criada – the goal is always liberation, but if people inside the get rowdy, the people who planned it could be considered for conspiracy
• Mention how many seconds the gate opens for
• Rueda, Evetts share Song’s dream — a confrontation
• Song is the one pulling the trigger — this is clearly established by the evidence
• They should have known what Song was going to do — because they knew the plan + that’s why they are charged
• Shows bodycam labelled Ambush
• He fired until his weapon jammed
• He probably got his by Gross’ rounds
• magazine still damaged nav
• Song planned an ambush — he planned a confrontation
• And everyone here — Sanchez were involved because they adopted antifa tactics of anarchism + communism
• Anti Fascist Handbook — Shidler told us about it
• Song’s phone had info about “opsec” — they are obsessed w/ it
• Rule #1 of opsec is the signal app
• The gov is lucky to get what we got
• Operational security is a plan
• Baumann says he wouldn’t have gone if he knew
• Phones go dark
• Joy Gibson was arrested on the ground
• Phones ping all day and then stays in their location — later recovered in a faraday bag
• Ines, Liz, Savanna all phones go dark at the exact same time
• Circle the block 3 times
• Why turn off phones? Why wear face coverings? B/c you know you’re about to do something illegal
• Evetts takes screenshots of tactics that the whole group uses
• We know this group does not like yellow vests
• Terrorism charge — supplying your

body in black bloc

• Blackblock – it says everybody should use
  it and everybody did
• there’s no secret btwn the defendants,
  it’s a secret from everyone else
• After action tactics – you weren’t there,
  you don’t know anything – Deblock – do it fast
• it’s a strategy and an attire
• Bloc, debloc, and practice it
• Debrief in person
• this is what Song did – asked people to put their
  phones in a microwave
• and we know what he did – shot a cop and
  at other officers
• Deblocking – ca Ines, Liz, Savanna, Sikes,
• [?] – cool as a cucumber and Ines says “we’re out for a walk”
• not masked up
• practiced exactly what Evetts had on
  his cloud on his phone
• antifa tactics
• After action
• cover your tracks
• then delete
• Hill is home at 12:52 AM others still there
• 45 minutes to drive from PDC to 56th St
• one hour left – what happened in that hour?
• who took her? We don’t know
• Why delete people from signal chats if its
  encrypted? If everythings legal?
• Delete this post
• Wendy’s post asked ‘did one of ours shoot a
  cop?’
• Hill – don’t talk about it
• we need to help these people double
  down on opsec
• Sanchez conspiracy – Kels says,
  “I’ll text someone who might know”
• no direct communication btwn Kels
• Des
• but they do have him leaving +
  heading to Maris house
• Mari calls her mom + tells Des
  to communicate w/ the community + with Kels
• implies he’s saying I’m moving stuff
  to the Denton apt
• Sin Pelots / Eminem Hater #1 talking
  about getting the sup (?)
• deleting things virtually + in the real world
• Where does he go? To the Denton Apt
• They have no idea what he’s moving
• Since there was an ambush, they think
  it was guns + bombs
• But what’s impt to the group is hiding this
  material
• moving documents
• Gov believed there were 2 shooters
• Then 1
• Song arrested 11 days later
• went to extreme lengths to protect + help
  Song escape
• They were devoted to him + his cause
• That’s why everyone was there
• They believed in him
• They’re anarchists + don’t believe
  in leaders but he was the ringleader of terrorism
• mul
• has multiple elements: destroying
  gov property (tires popped, camera
  on ground, van used to transport aliens
  damaged)
• Evetts bought fireworks with cash?
  Why cash?
• There’s nothing illegal about hating the
  gov
• Firing firework @ a facility + shooting
  a cop are illegal
• Charging is too long, 10 days of
  evidence
• The case doesn’t make sense
• red + black flag
• who knew?
• FTP, ACAB – They believe that
• Sanchez moved literature to hide ideas
  that were important to this group
  (?) – Savanna, Ines + Liz changed their name
  from AntifaDFW to the Emma GBC
• Summary: Public disturbance that
  …….
• material support – 2 elements
• Providing property, services, weapons,
  or personnel for others to do terrorism
• implies blackblac hid property

destruction + attempted murder

• You will not see Song’s face or
  any faces on body cams or
  CCTV footage
• what is an explosive?
• 1.4 firework that can be
  purchase at roadside store
• Fireworks are explosives
• They were used maliciously
• burn @ 1500° + were thrown
  at facility
• Is it perceivable for Rueda, Morris,
  Evetts + _____to know Song
  was going to shoot an officer
  Objection misinterpretation of law – overruled
• 3 minute warning
• Showed graphic – poorly explained it

[circled Venn diagram: EMBL | Antifa | SRA]→
[Direct
Militant
Action
Photo of BC]

• This means nothing until you
  know context
• What they’re discussing is what
  Sanchez was going out of his
  way to get rid of

Defense Closing Arguments
Defense – Davis – has allergies

• huge ask of jury / this doesn’t happen w/o you
• thank you for your time/ effort / life disruptions
• Set the stage
• From a legal standpoint – attempted murder
  requires an intent to kill w/ malice +
  forethought
• not accidental/reckless
• there has to be a substantial step towards
  that
• Defendant must attempt to kill that person
• counts 8,9,10 – use of firearm in furtherance of att murder / crime of violence
• Firearm must be discharged + knowingly carried it?
• count 11+12
• Requires an attempt to conceal, w/ intent to undermine justice… – not just move boxes
• count 12 – conspiracy to conceal
• partner in crime
• – must have knowledge of conspiracy + step towards
• count 2,3,4 – explosives
• count 4 – discharge explosive
• must identify if it was used, carried
• count 3 – defendant knew unlawful
  purpose
• – presence is not enough to prove
  conspiracy – need evidence
• Count 1 Riot – interstate commerce
  used to organize participate or
  carry on – after violence of 1 or
  more persons
• cannot include oral or written
  expression of beliefs
• Material Support to terrorism –
  How supported explosives charge,
  attempted murder, or __
  Religious materials not included

Cofer

• Gov spent time applying labels +
  making you see the defendants as
  others
• Even if they haven’t proven,
  they’re hoping you’ll overlook
  the lack of evidence
• Defense rested – surprised
• 10 days of evidence
• But there’s a difference btwn
  evidence + proof
• A lying witness is evidence but
  not proof
• You have a constitutional duty
• Satanic Death Cult – looks bad
  but its about movie reviews
• assumptions are not proof
• Gov spent 2 weeks telling witnesses
  what to say + you what to think
• Autumn Hill never went to range day,
  no DNA on any gun, no purchase of
  guns, no pictures of guns, no meme
  or jail call that suggests she’s
  violent + militant
• They showed Satanic Death Cult,
  Lucy’s journal, one video showing
  an AR
• They have no proof
• The D+N chat says nothing about
  the ambush
• These people in D+N were trying
  to bring the temp down
• She never engaged
• No evidence that she viewed messages
• Not in 4th of July chat, name not
  in other chats
• Gov asks you to presume whats
  not there in the govs favor
• but this is not the right country
• No evidence
• remember John Thomas – JBGC members
  identified immediately, SRA same,
  Antifa – couldn’t remember – showed
  him list provided by gov
• re: Baumann – once he found out
  about 15 years, he took a deal
• It’s nonsense that people confessed

to him

• its evidence but its not proof
• Baumann did not know Hill
• He was not near him
• Ambush idea seems like nonsense
• 2 guards walk past Song unarmed
  w/o getting shot
• That’s the time for an ambush
• Autumn had nothing to do w/ guns
  in a wagon
• re: gear check – Kent didn’t relay
  a plan of an ambush to Sikes
• Autumn may have asked about
  going armed
• Song never mentioned a planned
  shooting
• Hill’s phone was at home
• Song was not messaging her
• only evidence that _ picked up trash
  and left
• New fireworks that show they
  did not hit the building many
  times
• wanted to connect w/ detainees
• She left, made it home
• We always a 1st Amdt right to,
  2nd amdt right to protect
  family, + 6th amdt right to
  a jury trial to protect ourselves

from the gov

A2 Evetts

• Fireworks on the 4th of July
• Calling out “Esperanza”
• Calling out I see you
• Baumann did vandalism
• Song responded to Gross pointing
  a weapon at the back of a fleeing
  person
• Did the gov prove beyond a reasonable
  doubt?
• For each charge, did the gov
  rule out all reasonable doubt?
• If evidence is not clear, that’s
  reasonable doubt
• Planned to commit unlawful acts
• What was the plan – noise demo
• Did they do a riot? riot is not an
  impulsive act of violence
• Baumann came alone + did property
  destruction on his own
• Baumann walks towards the van
  hos has tires gets slashes
• maintained the story that the
  vandalism was Sikes until the plea
• Then shifts the blame to Evetts
• Never asks Baumann to identify Evetts
• Could Zach have left early? yes
• Only people in parking lot, nas

Baumann + 1 more – not 3

• riot charge fails there
• fireworks were peacefully
  demonstrating “Esperanza”
• Worth TX Antifa cell
• Every cooperating witness said
  they were telling the gov-approved
  story
• And we saw their reactions
• Lynette’s fear + despair @ 15 yrs
• Kent fighting back tears when
  asked about political persecution
• Thomas, Baumann, – telling
  the government’s story
• testimony cannot be trusted
• could be for their own interest
• evidence/booklets showing contradictory
  political beliefs – legal under
  constitution
• owned 100 guns – all legal
• what was the point? Scare
  you, don’t deserve Amdt protections
• Attempted murder of 3 people –
  why would only 1 person have
  a weapon in his hand (Song)?
• 2 PDC employees walk right past
• does it sound like
  an ambush or a chaotic reaction
• Gross raises weapon at someones
  back
• whole case collapses
• prosecutors write indictment, please
  read their story – sounds like a
  fantasy
• Gov wants Evetts to be the person who
  popped tires but Baumann
• he blamed it on Sikes, it could have
  been Baumann + Sikes and not
  taller achary Evetts
• Go home after this + think the truth
  is not manufactured, it simply is
• “The truth is that Zachary Evetts
  was not guilty”

A Hayes

• Thanks jury
• mr smith told a good story but lacks
  facts and evidence
• said “you know” a lot
• July 4 was a tragedy
• group of well meaning social misfits
  who wanna help others
• afraid of police + weary of police
• Police arrive aggressively
• first person to pull his weapon was
  Gross
• pull up w/ a cooler of fireworks
• waited in the road
• had time to hide
• there was no shots towards police until
  Gross pulled his weapon
• maybe they don’t know the
  def of ambush
• you can understand if you care
  about that person
• police see rifles + they’ll leave
  you alone
• weapons were in cars or packed away
• Sorry Gross got shot
• when the protestor saw the officer
  raise its gun
• He had a split second to react
• suppressive fire
• video → initial volley of fire lasted 1 second or less
• rifle aimed at the ground, not a
  person
• video – No attempt to harm
• exhibit 181 P6
• bullet shown – rickoshay bullet
• what caused it to slow down
• Harp forgot her statement said Gross
  pulled his weapon
• “I’ll pop your ass”
• Ranger talked about bullet strikes
  on the ground
• No photos out of 2,000 photos
• No bullet damage anywhere
  except to ground
• Officer testified its a good shoot
• Sikes testified people tried to
  help others
• Sikes / no one expected the shooting
• Attempted murder requires intent to kill – not intent to shoot
• Kent: What is antifa? No one had the same definition
• testified to help herself the gov
• the officer had a gun + they traded shots
• Thomas changed statement, they’ll
  try to overwhelm the jury w/ quantity
• all signal messages were defensive, not offensive
• teaches self defense, military __
• 1st Amendment right, 2nd Amendment
• Ben Song is not guilty of any charge
• we’ve heard of antifa, antifa
  antifa but where are the antifa-related charges?

Jury options: Stop here today,
keep going to 7:30 to finish
keep going to 6 + come back tomorrow

jury decides to finish it up tonight w/
a break from 6-6:30

• checking if Dallas 15 still open

30 people in Dallas – open but restricted
if they leave

A Tolbert

• opening statement – in America
  we don’t prosecute people for their
  political beliefs or demonstrating their political beliefs
• Savanna is charged for participating
  in a noise demo
• July 9 – Savanna had been in
  jail for 4 days
• Savanna lived alone
• Amazon package arrived July 5
• she was expecting to be there
• Nathan VanHorn testified they searched for 57 min
• broke window + took map in 57 min
• the map is clearly for planning
• Oct 2015 No Kings protest
• Phone search: 295 photos
• was there anything that connected her
  to a planned ambush on July 4, 2025?
• No
• The most damning piece of evidence
  was this photo of the EGBC the
  gov calls this their aha moment because 3 defendants are in it
  in the photo 14 people are shown
  reading a pamphlet
• search of Subaru: Savanna was a
  backseat passenger, only found
  ID, debit card, phone, health insurance card
• must intimate places to search: phone, apartment, car she was a passenger in –
  it wasn’t hers, it probably doesn’t exist
• location data: July 3 @ home, not at the gear check, stayed home until 8:37am on
  July 4, she went to work at Panera Bread
  and stayed until 5, then she went home,
  the Sotos picked her up + went to PDC
• collection officer said fireworks were shot
  from 50-100 yards from the detention center
• cooler of fireworks shown – commercial
  fireworks
• common sense – we know the difference
• brown fireworks on 4th July + trying
  to blow something up

---

• Trial within a trial – consider each defendant individually, consider each
• verdict sheet count 1-4 apply to Ms. Batten. She is #4
• mark is not guilty
• If there is reasonable doubt,
  you must acquit
• The government has not proven anything
  other than she went to PDC for the
  purpose of a noise demo

A St. John

• thanks jury / privilege to represent
  Morris / friend Pittman
• just presence + connect does not
  establish conspiracy
• She’s not a conspirator to anything
• She went + sat in her van
• The govt will never prove this
  because they can’t
• No part of chat talking about guns
• Pre-trial detention facility /
  not a prison
• Morris goes for a noise demo
• photo of van w/ Meagan in the van
• She never got out of the van
• She had a vest + gun which
  were legal
• One did not shoot fireworks
• Slag tires, spray paint, destroying
  a camera
• wearing black in her van
• Leaves in her van
• She’s not part of the conspiracy
• She went to the noise demo
• Sheriff, Rangers + FBI – called
  them and interviewed
• She cries + has cried during this
  trial because she’s terrified of being
  convicted for something she didn’t do
• took an oath the right thing
• Not guilty

AM Clayton

• quote from Mari’s message
• We can sear…”
  I’m interested in pots + pans + yelling
  to see if the detainees can hear
  them
• not an ambush, not an attack
• Govt presented many messages but
  skipped over these, why?
• She didn’t have weapons, she had
  a megaphone
• Fireworks display for detainees
• Riot requires an intent to commit
  violence
• where is the evidence?
• man felt betrayed by the way it
  ended b/c that was not the plan
• People had dispersed as soon as asked
  to leave
• Gross testified he only saw a few people
• Harp + Reedie saw groups + they all
  ran
• They didn’t see weapons + they
  weren’t shot at
• Officer testified that no arrests were
  made for fireworks that night
• He was surprised someone was
  arrested for fireworks on 4th of July
• She’s terrified of guns, doesn’t
  even hold a fake gun
• No evidence she helped
• conspiracy requires
  knowledge + intent (damaging
  federal property w/ explosives
  didn’t happen,
• The government said Mari + Danny conspired to move
  documents to hide evidence
• Danny went before her call
• documents contain nothing
  related to the protest at July 4
• found a few fireworks that weren’t introduced as evidence
• nothing illegal in house
• 2 Inds. Shelton + art but
  did not show consistent behaviors
• her behaviors: asked to leave
• ran (confirmed by Sikes)
• officers stopped people because
  they were wearing all black
  when asked to sit, she sat,
  she didn’t try to resist or dearrest herself
• Does having a stickers, aines
  bookclub + anti-fascist ideas
  make her a terrorist? No because
  her actions are not consistent w/
  terrorism
• 1st Amndmt case w/ definition of
  written by who
• terrorist specialist had to google
• his career may be boosted by the
  outcome of this case but this
  courtroom is not a lab + Maru
  is not a lab rat. Just b/c the
  gov believes something does not
  make it true. They have not proven
  beyond a reasonable doubt. NG

A. Burns

• govt investigated her personal life
• hours, phone + everything
• only proved she was at PDC protest
• she has a book club that the
  government hates
• DFW antifa has rebranded as
  EGBC based on a post it note
  w/ passwords that they didn’t
  put out
• DFW last post 2023
• EGBC Twitter starts in 2016
• Confiscating the printing press +
  book binding as evidence
• They kept those machines b/c they
  hate what gets printed at the Soto’s
  household
• Liz is innocent of all charges
• only came up w/ cooperators
• surprised she was there, she never
  goes to protests
• Signal chats available for review
• Husband said this is type of protest is fun + safe so they
  decided to go together
• Not in chats
• Not in gun clubs
• arrived late, fireworks already
  going off, doesn’t see any
  guns
• She has no clue anyone was armed
• detention center asked them to leave +
  she left
• Only here b/c of the gov’s narrative developed right as it was happening
• Gov said they were walking
  nonchalant — b/c they had no
  idea that someone was shot
• they may have heard shots
  but that doesn’t mean anything
• the weren’t wearing masks.
• What is the gov saying? If you
  wear a mask you’re antifa. If you don’t you’re antifa
• Govt is asking you to put
  protestors in prison as terrorists?
  -that’s never been done before
• You are the only people who can
  stop them.

B Davis

• Different political than you all
• Active discussions relation to these ideas
• Like in book club, facilitated discussions7
• Printing press – printing a book for
  someone – side hustle
• Zines are not illegal, nothing about
  this is illegal
• Sharp says he embraces an anarchist
  philosophy
• I didn’t know was anarchism was before
  this but it sounds pretty admirable even
  if not realistic
• Not in 4th of July or any other chat
• Sharp says surprised why the EGBC
  were there
• only evidence that 3 people shot fireworks
• left when asked
• not armed
• had a pistol in his car
• not an SRA member
• “cool as a cucumber”
• as he should be, he didn’t
  do anything
• “reconnaisance” passing 3 times
  everyone was already there
• Is it a riot if noone saw it? Harp didn’t see it, Rudy didn’t see it
• Baumann + I vandalized
• He didn’t know
• There was a noise demo
• What material support did he provide?
  Nothing
• IFAKs – even morning protest
  had first aid
• AFAIK would be good in
  a pick up truck
  -Medicine excluded from this count
  no evidence of Ines shooting fireworks
  Mr. Soto had 1 pistol in his car, no firearms in his home, but we saw a lot of pictures of guns. Why? to make you forget he didn’t have guns
• Baumann forgot about Ines
• Song, Rueda, + Soto should
  have affinity groups according
  to the government’s expert
• antifa was a united front
• EGBE, JBGB are all antifa
  groups, EGBE was the recruiting
  arm, he said
• Antifa DFW→ EGBC – debunked
• messages from 4 diff chats,
  3/4 Ines was not in
• Evidence does not surpo (support?)
• Counts 5, 6, 7 – who are
  the victims? Not identified
  in the testimony we heard

A Weinbel

• Gov has to prove a crime beyond
  a reasonable doubt
• Had no idea Prairieland
• on trial for carrying a box +
  conspiracy to carry a box
• arrested b/c they thought he might
  have bombs
• he didn’t but they didn’t walk
  it back
• all they had was a phone call
• arrested for the box
• claimed he was arrested for a
  wide right turn
• happened never before
• Denton apartment raided,
  confiscated items, guns, and
  have not returned them
• Broke doors + windows but did
  not arrest any of them
• journals, love letter from 2017,
  video from 2016, box – everything
  inside is from 2022 or earlier
• Lump every one together
• You can’t identify anyone
• Which one is Mari? They
  never showed you. B/c they
  want you to be confused
• Everything in the box was his
• He moved his own items to another

apartment

• moving his own stuff is not
  guilty
• they do not have the answer
  to what’s in that box, that’s
  a conspiracy
• they change their answers
• this narrative does not exist
• Are you not allowed to answer
  calls after someone gets arrested
• Or you have to wait to

.

• Rueda made the call while Sanchez already
  gone from his house
• Call to Des – you can listen to it,
  you only heard part of it
• “tow the car” is antifa
  for hide evidence
• She calls July 6 and he goes
  back in time to give him
  the conspiracy needed on july 5
• confused, car, house, car
• none of this is illegal to have
• don’t know which one was being use
• no instructions from Rueda
• no attempt to delete
• After they got the box, they didn’t
  use anything in the box against
  Rueda
• They cast a wide net + they can’t
  walk it back, there’s no mechanism
  for that
• “The police don’t say ‘I’m sorry’”
• witnesses making tons of assumptions
• Picture after picture of “scary” things
  to cover up from the fact they have
  no evidence
• We don’t lose our freedom when
  our friends get arrested
• We don’t lose our freedom when
  moving our own things
• Not guilty
• quote about arbitrary imprisonment
  historical

A Gato

• Asked to check your biases at the door
• Bring reason + common
  sense
• Pinkerton liability – I didn’t shoot,
  I didn’t use fireworks, I didn’t slash
  tires
• Ex. Person A, B, C Plan — Person
  A scouts cameras. Person C will
  drive there + plan the get away,
  Person M has idea. Person B says
  yes guns. Person A + C say guns
  will make it hot. Person B says
  guns will make it back off.
• Conspiracy — Actions were foreseeable
  with all involved
• You can’t say it wasn’t me
• Conspiring to materially support
• They knew they were trespassing,
  Ines told you
• “I was only present” they say
• Someone in a house could have
  come out + them —
  they would be present + a
  witness
• These 8 are not merely
  present, they are all masked
  up
• AH – you can’t prove she knew
  anything in those chats
  (misgendering)
• Morris drove + took people
  there, ID was found in their
  car
• AH leaves phone at home
• 2 rifles in the van
• 13 people all blacked out
• Includes Rose + Eagle — we don’t
  know who they are
• Baumann’s lying — doesn’t make sense,
  he didn’t say anything about Ines + Song
• Did Batten + Sotos know about the shooting?
  CCTV footage shows them?
• “Get to the rifles”
• Baumann lied? Evetts texted about it,
  He’s the only one wearing kneepads
• All black? why? confuse everyone
• Sanchez — I contacted some of the
  homes, the people we’ve come across
  and stuff, everybody’s trying to get
  things done
• Objection — not said- not evidence — overruled
• Implies their hiding things, like
  an insignificant box to Denton
• “Yeah I was just visiting friends + they’re
  not home”
• Sounds like Ines being nonchalant after
  the shooting
• Mari’s house was clean, he was
  there for 5.5 hours
• “my cars parked at the 2400 block of
  56th St” — she’s avoiding saying
  the house name
• “The person I’m in contact with”,
  “I don’t have the key”, Mari: “tow it”
• They are all connected
• Flyer w/ firework, Ines says
  fireworks are illegal in Alvarado
• Did you see any pots + pans?
  Didn’t see them
• What was there? Rifles,
  trauma IFAKs — not like
  the ones at the daytime protest
• Share only w/ trusted folks
• Rat in D+N
• They tattle on people doing illegal
  things
• Using analog radios, cellphones
  off or in faraday bags
• Why scout ahead of time? Legal
  noise protest
• gate times not necessary to know
• why are we deleting
• why is Hill saying don’t talk
  about what we dodn’t know +
  delete texts, if its legal
• They wanted an uprising.
• Don’t you think someone could
  get hurt? Detainee or guards
• They shot fireworks at the
  facility. This is malicious.
• Morris knew about the binary trigger
• Sotos + Batten were not charged b/c
  they were not at gearcheck, they’re
  not in Song’s inner circle
• We’re accused of overcharging
• We could have but we didn’t
• Morris + Song have known each other

for a long time. They know each other.

• Miracle that Gross’s not __
• Miracle that he returns fire
• Song doesn’t flee immediately
  until his gun jammed + he couldn’t
  clear it
• He intended to shoot/unload all 60
  bullets
• No other explanation but a guilty verd

Only thing left is deliberation. It’s almost
7:30. Decide on a foreperson + a time
to return tomorrow.

Juror 52 + 53 are alternate jurors. You
are released from your duties. You are
appreciated. Still required to follow rules until
notified.

Everyone else. Only talk about the case
in the deliberation room.

Jury dismissed

Has hearing at 1pm tomorrow. Also has
obligations on Friday. Busiest in the country.

[margin note: Defense attorney seemed surprised]

Evidence for both Defense + Prosecutor have evidence ready
Jury left with unedited copies of the charging
documents.

Cancelled spring break trip — Pitty

Jury will begin deliberating at 9

---

RS

3/11 Dallas overflow RS

• Arriving around 12:20. They are discussing the language in the charging document
• Events objections ← removing phrase “to incite a riot” and all mentions of words “incite” and specifically when related to riot charge, replace with “participating in.”
• Also agreeing to take out ‘promoting & encouraging’ language related to riot charge
• page 20, correctional officers are unnamed want to name them specifically to clarify charges count. State believes leave them as #1 & #2 is fine
• State wants language “with malice afterthought” added to attempted murder charge. Also “with malice forethought” this to appease as an objection note to original language.
• Break

1:40 Jury coming in, reading their instructions

• it is ‘your own recollection and interpretation of evidence” that decision is based on.
• Facts established by evidence, but deduction and common sense are fair game.
• must consider all evidence, but sole judge of believability or credibility of all/some/none of what witnesses said.
• evidence of good character not aligned w/ alleged crime may be considered as reasonable doubt.
• can accept or reject expert testimony
• defines term “willfully” as freely doing on purpose
• punishment/consequences cannot be considered in deliberation. That left entirely up to the judge.

1. Riot – used a facility of interstate commerce, and used it to riot, and attempted to commit an overt act

• Act of violence
• Damage or injury of property } 3 or more persons
• Threats of those acts } required participation

1. material Support terrorism – must be convicted each of following

• Attempt or did provide material support knowing/ intending they would be used to carry out… lists USC numbers but doesn’t say what they are [?]
  A. Maliciously damaged US property
  Bucket B. Willfully injured } must be convicted
  1 C. Attempt to kill officer } of one of these
  → emphasis on detail they must know the premeditated intent for A/B/C to happen

Bucket 2 above things w/ explosives
Bucket 3 willfully damage gov’t property

3. / conspire to carry explosive

• used explosive willfully/on purpose to do a riot
• conspired to carry explosives in pursuit of a riot
• need to agree on one or another, not both

3. Use explosives while doing a riot

5/6/7: Attempted murder

• must be malice criminal intent & must be employee of gov’t or assisting employee of gov’t
• premeditated

8/9/10: Discharging a firearm during a crime of violence. Use = more than mere possession, “cannot be incidental to crime”

11. Concealing documents, corruptly conceal a document, record or other object, acted knowingly or corruptly, and attempted to subvert or undermine pursuit of justice.
12. Conspiring to do #11

• must know the act was illegal (the concealing)

Conspiracy must be “reasonably foreseeable” to convict 1, 2, 3, 5-10.

1 8 have #1 (minus Des)

2 Hill, Song, Evetts, Botton, Morris, Rueda & Soles 8 have #2

3 Hill, Evetts, Song, Botton, Morris, Rueda & Soles = 8

4 same 8

5-7 Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda

: 8-10 Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda

11 Des,

12 Rueda, Sanchez

State close: “why riot? why wear black bloc? why get cash for fireworks? why put phone in Faraday bag?”

• Rueda quote from chat about risk, “why would they assess risk unless they were doing crime?”
• why bring these weapons to the prison?
• Song’s plan was to use people in his inner circle to accomplish his goal
  → Mentions quote abt “cops aren’t trained to deal w/ multiple rifles, it makes them back off”
• claims Morris, Hill, Song are AG bc they live together
• Song said 3 times “I’m not going to jail” but acknowledges that group refused proposal of breaking people out of detention
• “this was not a peaceful protest, this was a direct action”
• framing Song as leader who was “trying to build a confrontation”
• plays Gross video again with loud sound
• emphasizes phones off /Faraday as indication of intent to do something illegal. Really harps on it.
• Mentions tactics slides/pdf found in Evetts and Song’s iclouds.
• “You bloc, you debloc, and you do it fast”
• “its a strategy, its an attire”
• video clip of group of 5 walking away “cool as can be”
• Antifa important to understand bc “all things done by this group are hallmarks of those tactics” speaks to the afterward, how folks talked about deleting messages, attempting to hide their tracks is evidence of criminal intent
• says Des is doing same thing “by deleting things in the real world”
• admits they thought Des was moving guns/bombs etc, but says what was important to him & community was the anarchist “insurrectionary” materials. “Documents so that’s what he’s charged with.”
• gets into specific charges, says many times theres nothing illegal about the ideas or hating the govt, but does still say it was illegal to move the documents?
• gives quick definition of rioting and says “that’s exactly what everyone did” without actually giving any examples.
• talks about how fireworks are technically explosives, and are “thrown at a gov’t building”
• Ends by focusing on “reasonable foreseeability,” the conspiracy/Pinkerton stuff. Doesn’t talk abt specific chats or statements, points out the general insurrectionary politics.

Davis – Begins by thanking them for their service, wants
(ines sofu?) to give perspective. Attempted murder requires
” malice and forethought.” “very very high burden”

• for 8-10 says the firearm has to be discharged, not
  just carried.
• “knowingly and dishonestly”conceal, and it has to impair official proceeding
• Focus on the formal “meetings of the mind” to
  charge conspiracy
• Focus on knowingly and voluntarily doing something
  illegal. Implies had to know that the fireworks
  were illegal explosives, and that being there alone
  is not enough, higher bar.
• mentions needs for underlying charges in Riot

Cofer – “Some of you looked really surprised when defense rested”
(Bfill) – there is a difference bt evidence & proof

• “the govt spent 7 full weeks telling witnesses what
  to say and you what to think”
• Autumn personally didn’t own any guns, no evidence
  of her being part of any shooting days. Literally
  zero evidence
• they have absolutely nothing, they searched
  her house, phone, yet produced no evidence of
  her involvement, not on 4th July chat, no
  evidence she even saw any of the larger discussion
  chat messages.
• Focuses on Bauman being a liar,
• Ambush seems like nonsense, didn’t shoot at
  unarmed guards, Kent’s report back to sites –
  included nothing about Ambush.
• Song didn’t mention anything about people abandoning
  the plan or ambush afterwards.

Brossard – “Fireworks on 4th of July was all this was
(Evetts) planned to be”

• Act of love towards these detainees
• Hammers on Bauman being a liar, changing his
  story. But either way Riot charge requires 3
  or more participants. No dispute that only 2 people
  in parking lot did property damage.
• Emphasizes the testimony of cooperators that
  none of them actually accused defendants of being
  antifa.
• Really goes after Bauman
• Calls the initial reading of an indictment as a
  lurid [?] fantasy

Song – well meaning social misfits, they are afraid
of police, leery of police. He stood in middle
of road carry a flashlight, does that sound
like an ambush? Reflective gaiter,
reflective cart. No use of bipod.

• Everything in signal chat abt rifles is defensive in
  nature “to keep both sides honest”
• talks about suppressive fire as being defensive

perhaps hoping that Gross would duck or look
away, not intending to harm him.

• Asks to play video in slow motion to show
  dust clouds from the ground. Makes
  argument for a ricochet bullet. The gunfire was
  only one second. And aimed at ground, couldn’t
  have aimed at Gross and ground at same time.
  If Gross bullet his side of Song’s gun, that
  means his gun must have been pointed sideways!
• Attempted murder requires intent to kill, can’t
  be attempt to maim or injure or unintended [?].

(Batton) – In America we don’t prosecute people for their
Tolbert[?] political beliefs, yet 7 1/2 weeks later we see
Vonna being prosecuted for participating in noise demo
in pursuit of her political beliefs”

• only thing they found of evidential value in search
  of apartment was a map from No Kings March/protest.
• points out photo from EGBC that is not the
  “AHA” moment the govt thinks that it is. Its
  14 people in a circle reading a book/pamphlet.
• No evidence of participation in any planning,
  any conspiracy.
• Goes through timeline of her day on 3rd and 4th
  being home at work, then getting picked up by
  Sotos.
• Emphasis on common sense that fireworks
  are not intended to blow anything up, not

trying to start a fire or damage property, simply
setting off fireworks

• The evidence doesn’t lie she only set off fireworks
  didn’t do anything else.

Megan Morris – Megan Morris wasn’t in July 4th chat, was only
(St. John) the driver, never got out of the van. Only thing
they can prove of her is that she was there. She
was terrified and “fucking pissed off” when she talks to
cops afterwards. Mad that a shooting happened.

Rueda – opens w/ quote from Fundy [?] chat abt making noise
(Clayton) that the State skipped over. Thats what she put on
the flyer, she was carrying the megaphone.
nothing else.

• In order for it to be a riot, there has to be an
  intent to engage in violence. Even cooperating
  witnesses said it was planned to be a noise demo.
  Points at Morris felt betrayed bc of the shooting.
• Protest dispersed when correction officers came
  out and told them to leave.
• we heard from cooperators that Mari was afraid
  of guns and wasn’t ever gonna be part of a plan
  involving firearms.
• Emphasis lack of damage and intent w/ fireworks
• Points out timeline discrepancy w/ moving docs
  and that none of those docs were related to
  the events of July 4th.

Burns – Searched all her life and found nothing abt
(Liz Soto) planning or involvement in chats, her main tie- in
in alleged twitter account.

• Collaborators say they don’t see her at protests or
  planning very often. Surprised to see her as a
  defendant, not part of any gun clubs
• Showed up, watched people shoot off fireworks
  and left when asked.
• points out they had no clue when they heard
  shots fired that someone had actually been shot.
• govt is asking yall to put protesters in prison
  for terrorism.

Davis – Search warrant for “mass production of propaganda”
(Ines Soto) – printing & distro are all legal.

• not in any of the scary chats/planning chats
• says not in the inner circle “AG” described by Sharp.
• said Song expressed regret that Sotos got involved in
  this. Left scene when guards came out
• “cool as a cucumber” comment, “most people are
  when they haven’t done anything.”
• “Is it a riot if Nobody is aware of it?”
• Arrived late, no evidence of shooting fireworks
  left when told.
• “you can be antifa and not even know it”
  according to govt expert

Chris • He had no idea that Prairieland was going to
(Weimann) happen according to govt

• Instead of finding evidence they made what he
  had evidence.
• never showed the jury what evidence from box
  has anything to do w/ Mari and this case.
• Everything in the box is Des’ not Mari’s.
• points out he didn’t even go to the car
• no attempt to burn or destroy. Agent on the
  stand said none of the box evidence was used
  against Rueda .. its not actually evidence
• really excited, most high energy of everyone.
  Emphasis on fact that the box wasn’t actually evidence
  of anything.

---

SO

“Video and Audio Muted on Request of the Court”
Attorney called IT. It is 11:05, court was supposed
to start at 11. IT said that is what court wants us to
see, there is no problem with the feed.
[NYT, AP & Gothamist are in courtroom]
Video turned on @ 11:30. Courtroom empty. Exhibits
covered in black cloth.

12:05 USA vs Cameron Hill et al.
Jury eating lunch.
Jury charge includes instructions (objections & requests already
submitted). Judge wants to know if there are objections
to Transfer of Intent suggested by Govt. Judge wants to
know if there are accuracy errors. Closing – govt
get 75 min, each defense atty gets 15 min. Arguments
should be structured around the court’s charge.

Offense Transferred intent. Objection is that the law requires specific
intent.
Govt 2 cases: De La Rosa vs Lynaugh 817 S 2nd 259 ’87 5th
circuit case. Transferred intent only applies if the intent
existed, but the wrong person was harmed.
People vs Blast 26 Cal 4th 313.
Govt. Applies that there was attempted murder. Govt says this
goes back to 1576 case. “acting with ill intention”.
You are responsible for the consequences of your Criminal Conduct.
Judge Anything new?
D Pg 26 of your charge. Needs to move to page 17+18. As
written, they confuse jury.
D Re transferred intent. No new info came out in trial
that would result in this argument being added.

D Defen. Indictment does not require malice aforethought.
Judge Arguments made and preserved.
D – Re solvent’s [?] area. Not clear whether Dept of War or Dept
of Defense should be used.
Judge – Will leave as “Dept of Defense (War)”
D – page 10. “to incite & inciting”
(Was not in indictment – should not be in charge.
18 USC 2102 is constitutionally overbroad.
D’Urile [?] – 2nd Circuit from 2012
Re overbroad.
Mishelas [?] 972 F 3rd 516 4th Circuit case 2020
P Agrees to take out “inciting” “urging”
D “promote, encourage, inciting” should not be in there.
Rundo 900 F 3rd 9th circuit 2021
P Agrees to take out “incite a riot”
J Count 1 riot 516 2101 (asks judge mode)
P Agrees to take out “in inciting a”. “to incite” s/b
changed “to organize”. Purpose of “in inciting a”
“purpose of organizing”. “Promoting” “encouraging” taken out
D that takes care of concerns.
D Re use of pronoun “him/her. Factors to consider include sex,
(No) D. Re guidance not to G[?].
“You can’t kill a fake name.”
Govt P “To kill with malice aforethought”
Believes that correction officers 1 & 2 have been covered in
testimony.
Judge Will make corrections. Should take around 30 minutes.

1:35pm Charge to the jury
Judge will read charge. It will be given to them for their
deliberation.
There are 2 judges (judge & jury)
Judge will give instructions and specific rules and procedure.
Jurors are judges of the fact.
Duty to apply the law as judge explains it.
Indictment is not evidence of guilt.
Defendant is assumed innocent.
Govt. must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Lawyer’s function is to point out things that might have
escaped your notice.
Some evidence & testimony has been removed from the record.
Do not assume that judge has any opinion.
You do not have to be convinced whether it is direct or circumstantial
evidence.
Must consider all evidence. You must consider whether
you believe testimony.
Consider witness’ motivation and accuracy.
Consider all witnesses.
In determination regarding an issue is true, you may
consider all information.
Never convict solely on the basis of a co-defendant’s statement.
Judge is expert on all persons [?].
Transcript will be provided to jury. Tape recording also
provided. What you hear on tape is evidence if there is
discrepancy.
Must accept translation of information in another language.
Each count and each defendant should be considered separately.

Should not be concerned with potential of sentence.
Base determination solely evidence received during trial.
Must decide whether Govt has proved its sentence [?] beyond
a reasonable doubt.
Must determine presiding juror.
During deliberations –

Count 1 – Riot. Aiding or abetting is clothed [?] with riot.
Govt must have proved beyond reasonable doubt.
1 public demonstration
2 threat or threats of violence
Organize riot does not include advocacy of a position
Commerce – travel, trade, internet, telephone
Count 2 – Material support to terrorist.
1 D provided support or attempted to supply material support.
2 D intended to aid in support.
Verdict re: Guilty or Not guilty must be unanimous.
Govt. must prove beyond reasonable doubt.
1 D damaged property of U.S.
2 D willfully injured
3 D attempted to kill any officer of U.S.
Cause for anyone to damage or destroy property with explosive
1 explosive means gun powder, smokeless powders, etc
2 property – building, vehicle of govt department
3 maliciously –
1 Injured anyone
2 Was U.S. property
3 Damage over $1,000 [?]
4 Done willfully

Count 3 Explosive used to commit a felony offense.
Govt must prove:

1. D agreed to use explosive to riot
   2 D agreed to carry an explosive @ time of felony offense
   3
   3 D knowingly committed a felony
   Mere presence at the scene of an event does not necessarily
   provide proof of conspiracy.

Count 4 Use & carry an explosive to commit a felony
Govt must prove.
1 D used explosive
2 D did so to commit riot

Count 5&7 Attempt to murder an officer or employee of the U.S. w/ malice
afterthought.

1. Attempt to kill w/ malice aforethought.
   Malice afterthought – may consider
   use of weapon and manner in which death was caused.

Counts 8,9,10 Using a weapon or firearm in relation to federal crime of
violence
1 D committed offense
2 D used or carried firearm
3 D firearm was discharged

Count 11 Concealing document or record.
Crime to corruptly conceal a document.

Count 12 – Conspiring To corruptly Conceal a document

• D must have Knowingly corruptly concealing a attempting
  to Conceal a document
• participation in Criminal Venture.

Counts 8-10 govt must prove that principal would carry a firearm.
Pinkerton A conspirator is responsible if they were part of a
conspiracy, if a co-conspirator committed a crime + if
they could have known that the crime would be committed.
Count 1 – aiding + abetting riot.
?
Count 2 – material support to terrorists

• Evetts, Song, Batton, Morris, Rueda, E Soto, D Soto
  Count 3 – Conspiracy to
• Hill, Evetts, Song, Batton, Morris, Rueda, E Soto, D Soto
  Count 4 – use + carry an explosive
• Hill, Evetts, Song, Batton, Morris, Rueda, E Soto, D Soto
  Count 5 – attempted murder of govt employee
• Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
  Count 6 attempted murder
• Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
  Count 7 attempted murder of govt employee
• Hill, Evetts, Morris, Rueda, Song
  Count 8 – carrying firearm
• Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
  Count 9 – discharging firearm
• Hill, Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda
  Count 10 – discharging firearm in relation to act of violence
• Hill [?], Evetts, Song, Morris, Rueda

Count 11 – Corruptly Concealing documents

• D Sanchez
  Count 12 – Concealing documents
• Sanchez

Govt Closing 50 min

• Savanna’s phone – govt – asked “Why riot?”
  Why was BIBI? Why bring explosives?
  Clearly attempt to damage property.
  Rueda is involved in chats. Said everyone needed to take acct. of risk.
  BIBI is a disguise. Provides anonymity.
  Why would you bring rifle to prison. No evidence of counter protestors.
  Why bring first aid kits unless you were worried about getting shot.
  This was Song’s plan to build a [?] fortification. Song said fire aims
  make officers back off.
  Song called his group an Affinity Group, including Morris + Hill
  Song suggested breaking detainees out of jail.
  Song said he was bringing rifle because “I’m not going to jail.
  What is govt of suppressive fire? You’re trying to kill them.”
  Song videos Antifa[?] hero who was shot trying to burn down ICE
  facility.
  God is always liberation. Evetts twisted how long gate at PDC
  takes to open and close.
  Morris, Hill, Evetts + Rueda all had reasonably [?] foreseeably [?]. They knew
  what Song is capable of.
  As soon as Gross gets out of car, [?] Song tells everyone to get to
  the rifles. Song shot until weapon was damaged.
  Song planned an ambush. Everyone else [?], other than
  Sanchez was part of helping to carry this out.

Defendants used tactics that assisted in injuring of a cop.
Operational Security OPSEC is what group talks about.
Everyone but Bauman went dark (Faraday bags or left home)
“Why turn phones off? Why wear face coverings? Because you
know something illegal is about to happen.”
Msg says “Stay mobile. Stay destructive.”
Song said he shot the cop + the other officers.
Group debriefed after event. Other [?] asked what they were
bring. [?] said, “We’re out for a walk.”
Ambush, debriefing, Coverup.
Everyone starts deleting messages. Why delete if they are in encrypted chat?
Because they are doing something illegal.
Sanchez goes to Rueda’s home. No phone call between Sanchez + Rueda.
Sanchez says everyone is getting things done. Sanchez goes to
Destroy [?]. Sanchez + Rueda wanted to hide material –
documents. Everyone went to lengths to help Song escape –
because they believed in his cause. Song clearly ring leader.
Rioting, providing material support, using explosives,
destruction of govt property (broken camera, pepper [?] [?]).
Why take out cash to buy fireworks? Explosives thrown at
structure. [illegible] Who knows what black + red flag is
Anarcho-Communism? Sanchez moved documents – went
out of his way to hide. Changed name from Antifa International
to EGBC. Material support is providing your body or in
commission of a crime. Using explosives is straight-forward [?].
A 4×4 firework is an explosive. Were used maliciously. Thrown
at facility.
Pinkerton liability. It is reasonably foreseeable.
objection / [illegible] govt [?] prose [?] overruled.

Song used weapons to shoot a cop. Clear conspiracy to use fireworks
engage in domestic terrorism. They are brought together by
Antifa + SRA.
EGBC (formerly Antifa-DFW) picture shows defendants talking
about what Sanchez was hiding.

Stinson [?]
Davis
Overview

Thank you to jury. To convict on attempted murder you
need to find malice aforethought. High burden.
8,9,10 charge re: use of a firearm – has specific requirements.
11-12 related. Knowingly + dishonestly moving objects.
4 use explosive OR Carried an explosive during offence of riot.
5 Conspiracy – agreement, that defendant knew of illegality.
Just being there is not enough.
(1) The riot used a facility of Commerce. Cannot include
advocacy.
2) Material support to terrorists terrorists

Cofer
(Hill)

Govt has spent a lot of time in encouraging you to see defendants
as “the other.” The govt has not proven their case.
There is a difference between evidence and proof.
You have a constitutional duty to determine whether the
govt proved its case. The govt spent 2 weeks telling the
witnesses what to say + you what to think.
Hill – not associated with guns – no 2 [?] mail. Have her phone,
searched her home. No evidence. “Not one piece of proof.”
Chats say nothing about an ambush. No evidence that Hill
saw the chats – Chat reads “Not give noise demos.”
Govt wants you to presume in favor of govt. What Mrs
Smith said is not evidence. Non [?] witnesses said Hill
was part of Antifa. Bauman was lying from the beginning.

Bauman did spray painting. Hill was not heard.
Ambush? 2 unarmed guards came out – that would
be who you ambush. Song never said he was abandoned
by other defendants. Hill showed up, picked up trash
and left. Fireworks were not aimed at building.
No Hill wasn’t part of any plan for riot, any plan for ambush.
She is clearly innocent. We have a 6th amendment right
to a jury trial to protect us from the government.

(2) Bonilla Fireworks on the 4th of July. Calling out
(Evetts) “Esperanza” (Hope) to the detainees. That was the plan.
Until the officer pulled his gun. Both evidence + lack of
evidence are considered in trial. Accusation was that
Evetts and others planned a riot. Riot is individuals
[?] who plan to do violence. Bauman vandalized vehicles or his
own. Did the government rule out that [illegible] Bauman acted on his own?
[illegible] told police that it was someone else. Riot charge
fails – just one person involved.
Fireworks were not used in connection – with a riot.
Shinder [?] said “If you say you are antifa, you’re antifa.
If you say you are not Antifa, you’re Antifa.”
We should view these witnesses with extreme suspicion.
Prosecution talks about propaganda. Govt doesn’t like it.
But it is legal. Govt showed a number of guns
Govt alleges 3 attempted murders – why would Song
be the only one with a gun? Does it sound like a
planned shooting, or a chaotic reaction? What was
planned + what happened is subjective. Please read govt
indictment again. Follow the law about reasonable doubt.

The truth is, Zachary Zoetts [?] is not guilty

Mayor – What happened on July 4th was a tragedy. Group afraid of police.
(Song) First person to pull out firearm was Lieutenant Goss
No shots at police or guards until Goss pulled out firearm.
Objection
Judge rephrase + move on.
Presence of rifles at protest is to keep ourselves safe – not of [?]
their conversations were in regard offensive action.
Suppressive fire not to present lasted a second or less
One second volley was aimed at ground. Physical evidence
does not match up with what govt is trying to sell you.
Bullet that hit officer was a ricochet
Song’s gun was probably hit by Goss’ gun
2,000 pictures + 0 pictures of bullet strikes in the ground
No bullet strikes on building, a [?] anywhere else.
Sykes was armed, but had no intention of shooting anyone.
Song never used any traced [?] violence toward police.
When prosecutor does not have quality of evidence that they
will sometimes go to quantity.
We have 1st Amendment right to protest
We have 2nd Amendment right to our guns.
Not only is Song not guilty.
Judge – “all right” (stopping close)

Ten Minute Break.

Christopher – Savanna on trial for participating in a demonstration.
[illegible] Follow the evidence. 7/1/25 [?] Savanna was in jail. FBI
(Batten) raided her apt, broke window, damaged door. Only item

they took from her apt was a map. This map was for No Kings protest.
295 photos from Savanna’s phone. Not connected to a planned
ambush. The most damning piece of evidence was a picture she
took at 26BC. Govt says this connects her to 2 of the other
defendants. Savanna was backseat passenger in Soto’s vehicle.
No evidence found in phone, apartment, or vehicle she rode in.
July 3rd – Savanna was at home – did not go to gear check.
Went to work morning of July 4th (Panera Bread) was there
until 5. Soto’s picked her up at 9:42pm. Savanna
set off fireworks. Judge instruction: say that you
must give separate consideration of the evidence as to each
defendant. Govt has burden of evidence. Govt. has not
proved anything other than attendance at noise demonstration.

St. Joe –
(Morris) Mere presence at the scene of events does not prove a
conspiracy. Morris is not a co-conspirator. Morris is not
on July chat which referred “bring a gun”
Picture taken by police officer – Morris was in van. Did not
participate in demonstration. In van entire time. She went
to do a noise demonstration. Morris terrified of being tried
for something she didn’t do.

Clayton – Rueda talked about making noise. Pots + Pans, people yelling
(Rueda) So detainees can hear them. She had a megaphone in her
hand. She agreed on a noise demonstration with fireworks to
support detainees. No proof of intent to engage in violence.
When detention officers told them to leave, most of them
left. By the time detention officers came out, they saw only
2 people. Rueda would never be involved in firearms. Govt

Govt has no evidence that there was material support to
terrorism. No one knew Bauma [?] planned vandalism.
Fireworks were up in the trailer 50 yds from the structure
Re: document conspiracy, the box that supposedly contained
evidence, the evidence had nothing to do with July 4th.
Govt. wants to say the literature was evidence.
Night of PDC, Rueda left when told to. The group did not
de-block [?] – all were wearing black clothes. Do ideologies make
her a Terrorist? Absolutely not! Not consistent with her
behavior. Did she use explosives to harm property.
Govt antifa expert said that outcome of this trial would [?] good [?]
his career.

Burns – Z was at PDC + has book club that govt hates.
(2 [?] Soto) DFW Antifa taxes ended in 2023. Printing press
seized as evidence. Govt kept machine. Govt has burden
of proof. Z Soto is innocent of all charges. Cooperating
witnesses all said that they don’t see Z Soto at events –
just social events and book clubs. Her husband said protest
would be safe. They went together. Z Soto not in gun
club. Came late to protest. Goes over by fireworks. Does not
know that anyone has gun. She left when asked to.
She is here because of govt narrative. They weren’t wearing
masks, didn’t run from police, didn’t know someone had
been shot. Govt is asking you to put professors in prison.

Dano – Inez is a leader in 26BC. Does a lot of printing. Prints
(I. Soto) zines. Not illegal. Printing not illegal. Inez advocates
anarchist viewpoint. Soto not in chats that talk about

4th of July. Inez did not shoot fireworks. Left when
guards came out, well before shooting. Inez not an SRA
Member. Is it a riot if no one noticed it? No damage
to facility. No attempt to break into facility. Soto not
involved in vandalism. Govt made much of IFAKS.
Even the peaceful protest had first aid kits. Conspiracy to
use explosives. Inez didn’t use explosives. Inez had one
pistol in his car. Now in his home. Govt showed a lot
pictures of guns. Expert – is high priced guy from out of
town. Expert said EGBC, SRA + JBGC are antifa
groups. Antifa DFW did not become EGBC.
Evidence does not support that Inez committed any
of the charges.

(Sanchez) On trial for carrying a box, we arrested him because
they he might have bombs. All they had was a phone
call. Sanchez was arrested for having a box. Govt
took everything from the apartment. They broke door
and windows of apartment. Sanchez – they didn’t
show that Sanchez had anything related to Rueda.
Pamphlets in the box – they all belonged to Sanchez.
Govt wants you to believe that moving a box of your own
stuff is a federal crime. Nothing here is illegal to
have. Agent said that nothing in the box was used to
charge Rueda. I very quite said “I interpreted”,
“I assumed”. But unwilling to assume when it
came to answering defense. Daniel Sanchez not
guilty.

Govt – You were asked to check biases at the door. Ask yourself what
rebuttal your wisdom + common sense tells you. Pinkerton is
nearly 100 years old. Gives example of 4 people robbing
bank and one person shoots security guard. If you are
part of conspiracy then what happens in the crime makes
all responsible.
Conspiring to trespass makes them all accountable.
Purpose of BIBL – “you can’t tell who’s who in the zoo.”
Did the Soto’s + Batten know about the shooting?
objection / overruled w: Sanchez
Sanchez getting box out because it connected defendants.
Rueda wanted car moved because it was at “staging”
location. Fireworks are illegal in Alvarado.
There were no pots and pans at PDC. Trauma IFAKS were
there. Using analog radios (can’t be tracked.) Why some
are ahead of time. Why delete posts? Why moving box?
They wanted an uprising. They shot fireworks at
building. Callous disregard. “All of this was foreseeable.”
We didn’t charge Batten + the Soto’s for attempted murder
because they were not in gear check and planning.
Gross shot Song’s rifle. Song doesn’t have amts [?] his gun or jams.
If cop hadn’t disabled gun, Song would have killed cop [?].

Judge – Decide when you want to come back to begin deliberations.

Jury will return @ 9am 3/12.

---

VJ

Atty #3.

Fireworks on 4th of July.
was all this was ever planned.
Evetts → Hope for detainees Love, “hi en [?]
you.” Until Nathan went off
vandalizing + Song pulled out gun.
An yourself.
Did Govt prove each
element of evidence Beyond a
reasonable doubt? If not, they
have not proven trustworthy
evidence.

Zach – accused planned to
commit serious criminal acts
Plan was to —— fireworks on 7/4.

Define RIOT – Not an impulsive
act. Nathan came alone w/
spray paint. Did not tell anyone.
He did it on his own. Did govt
rule [?] Rule out all destroyed was
done by Nathan. Camera shows
Nathan was var [?]. Nathan
maintained Seth Sylas vandalized.
Then changed story to name
Evetts. He admits he falsely
accused Sylas. But after govt

Would they wait until Calvary w/
guns showed up?

Govt rephrased some things
Autumn said.
Chats from Song, after picked up
did he say anything about being
abandoned, info [?] & ambush, … etc.

Autumn was at home 7/5 – Song
did not contact her.

Evidence what happened at PL
the fireworks – all frames show
not hitting Build’ng – only one –
does it make sense that they “missed”
that many times.

Autumn Hill is not guilty.
We all 1st Amn Right
2nd Amnt Right
6th Amendment Rights [?]

Searched her house + found
Lucy [?] Andy’s [?] journal. If Govt had one
piece of proof, they would put it
on loop. In chats, not one word
about ambush. They talk about
parking, etc. Defendants were trying
to bring temperature down.
Autumn not in 4th of July chat.
Autumn not on Party chats.
Govt wants you to presume + fill
in the gaps.

If there had been one piece of
evidence against Autumn – it would have been shown.
Mr. Smith + John Thomas are only
ones who said Autumn was part of
Antifa. Thomas was prompted by
Smith to name Autumn Hill.
No one said Autumn was —

Nathan slapped w/ reality of 15 years in
prison, starts cooperating w/ Govt. We
know he was lying. Blamed Seth
Sylas for what he did.
Autumn had nothing to do w/
destroying property.

Ambush Two officers walked
out, no one shot at them. Why

Count 1 + 2 – most complicated
to organize + participate in a riot.
Cannot include ideas

Provide material support of
terrorism. Prove How [?] did someone provide
material support to offense?

Atty #2.

Govt – applying labels, trying to
make defendants be seen as the “other”,
hoping you’ll see that instead of
evidence.

The Defense rested because they
trust the jury to do the right thing.
Difference between evidence + proof.
Assumptions + opinions are not
proof, 100s of pictures, but show —
lawfully owned firearms.
Govt spent 2 weeks telling
witnesses what

Autumn did not have gun on
7/4. Not part of SRA. Did not own
a gun. Never encouraged any one to use
a gun.
No proof that Autumn is guilty.

Opening for All
Defense Atty #1 – [illegible]
Thanks the jury for serving.
Set stage. Soto, Diaz.
Legal stand point, attempted murder,
have to find intent to kill with
malice + forethought. Not accidental.
Very specific. Requires specific proof.

Counts 8, 9, + 10 – discharging firearm
w/ intent. Just because a gun was
used, doesn’t mean it was used for
that.

Not just move something, you
have to hide it, impair it. Not
just move it. There has to be a conspiracy
to do that.

Charges 3 + 4 – Explosives
Used explosive to incite [?] the riot
or carried the explosives, to commit that
offense.

Partnership in crime. Defendant
knew of purpose. Your presence is
not enough. Just being there is not
enough.

No one knows who shooter is by looking
at body cam, CCTV. Can’t see faces.
Intentional. Part of the charge.

Fireworks / Explosives used for
destruction. Thrown at facility.

Was it reasonably foreseeable that
Song would shoot a cop?
Song acted w/ intent to kill. Would
have shot other rounds at others?

[margin note:] Consider malice + forethought –

Hill’s objection – (?)

Clear conspiracy to use fireworks

• domestic terrorism. They knew he
  was going to shoot cop. Antifa, et.
  result in militant action.

Connect the dots. From Savanna
phone, showing Emma Goldman Bookclub [?]
having meeting. Context matters.

They are “anarchists” – don’t believe
in leaders. But Song is clearly the
leader.

Why did Evetts take out cash to
buy fireworks?: Cover tracks.

Its legal, guns legal.
What is illegal is how those were
used. To shoot a cop to shoot
ANYONE, is illegal. It’s murder.

Trial took 10 days to present all
evidence. Black + Red flag – Antifa (Anarchist)
Not illegal to believe – all police are
bad, but it is illegal to ———

Sanchez moved documents to
conceal evidence. They went out of
their way to hide their materials because
it was important to them. Why change
name from Antifa to Emma Goldman
Book Club.

Aiding sitting [?]. Clear + present danger.
Material support – property, your
body in camouflage.

Song said “Delete”

Why delete? Why cover up? Because
they know they’re doing something illegal

Wendy – Evetts’ wife
Wendy asked, did one of ours shoot
a cop? Told “Delete this post.”
Govt has no dir communication between
10:18 AM — Kelsey + Des
But they knew

1:31 pm going to ———.
Mari tells mother, “tell Danny” to go to
Kels (?) Des “Contacted some of the homies
everyone is trying to get things done.”

• talking about getting rid of jeep.
  Sanchez is part of the “real world”
  deleting things.

Des goes to ———, moving what’s Govt
doesn’t know. An ambush at Prairieland
so they think guns, +. But what is
important to Des + Mari – getting rid
of insurrectionist hating the govt material.
Song is #1 on the run.
All went to extreme lengths to hide
Song. Why? They are devoted to him.
All helped. Because they believed in
a cause – his cause.

Evetts phone- Antifa symbols.
Advice about tactics this whole
group used. Stay mobile, stay
[illegible] . NOT peaceful.
Wearing Black Block so no one can
be identified. This is terrorism.
Echoes Batten’s phone. “Provoking a
riot.” No secret among defendants.

After action → say you’re a law abiding
citizen and NO NOTHING
Block + deBlock + do it fast.

Thomas + Sharp – Song said told everyone to put
phones in microwave.
After action. Show video of Sotos, Evetts, etc.
looking like nothing had happened.
4 min after cop shot, they are as cool
as cucumber.
Inez says “Out for a walk.”
All practiced Antifa tactics.
Leave, cover tracks.
Hill home 12:31AM. 45 min to drive to
56th Street house. What happened in that
hour? Who took her? We don’t know.

The defendants aren’t here for
political ideas. They’re here for

ref: Antifa Handbook.

Song’s – info about basic operations
———. They are all obsessed w/ this.
One thing they use is Signal –
Govt was lucky to get the info they
got off the phones.

Look at how all phones went black.

Weider [?] state testified
Said he if he knew what they were
doing he wouldn’t be there

Gibson arrested on the ground. That is
where — phone was.
→ Govt tells where all defendant phones
were at the time of shooting.

→ Soto car went around block 3 times,
parked a block away.

Why turn phones off? Why wear face
coverings at 10:40 at night? Because
you know something illegal is going to happen

More chats –
Mari — “I will say goal is always
liberation. Free prisoners. But
I will say pop off ….”
Mari & Evetts are hand in hand.
Evetts – “Gate takes — time to open
+ stays open —” Why? Because
this is what they hoped would
happen.

Autumn Hill, Evetts, Mari — Liable for Song's actions.
Song is one pulling the trigger They knew
                                what he
Sharp said the Sotos did     would d.
                    not knowing
the plan

As soon as Lt Gross gets out of car,
Song says 2 times – Get to rifle. He
has one in his hand – He’s saying, I’m
fixing to shoot. He would have kept
firing all 100 rounds if it hadn’t
jammed. He knows how, he’s trained.
Song he planned the ambush

    Everyone else here helped him.

Pre designed by tactics by Antifa.

Song wanted to create a conflict.
– Evett says what are we going to
do? Slash tires? (Evett does this)
Song “Picking a good confrontation is about
building momentum.”
Song’s affinity group. Words the
defendants used. At 56th Street
residence w/ Morris & Hill.
Kent said, Song was talking about
freeing political prisoners. Moved on from this.
But then, “are we still moving our rifles?”
Song “Yes. I’m not going to jail.”

Hill part of gear chat. Played video
Laying down suppressive fire.
    The gun had 60 [?] rounds. Not to scare
someone. To kill someone.
    Song plays videos about it, trains
people.
    Mari & Morris talking about affinity
groups. "Who are you mad at? Your
friends or the State?"
    This was not a peaceful protest. It
was a direct action.
    Song idolizes an anarchist trying
to burn down an ICE facility.

                Officer 1

Duplicate Charges – Officer 2
Officer 3

US Govt Closing Arguments
Smith – 50 min
SAVANA Batten phone – why not, why wear
black clothes, why pay cash for legal
fireworks, why put phone away?

• Because you’re about to do something
  illegal at a prison (Prairieland). Explosives
  Burn at 1500 degree F. Being thrown at
  facility w/ reckless disregard & malicious
  attempt to damage property. Mari is in between 2 chats 4th of July
  Party “people need to make power plans,”
  other chat: Risk is everyone needs to take account.
• Why? If you’re doing something peaceful.
• Wearing black was a disguise, Black Bloc
  provides anonymity anonymity [?]
• Why bring guns to a prison? (plays video sound
• There were no counter protestors of shots)
• Brought First Aid kits. This was about
  getting shot.

Count 3 – Conspiracy to use + carry explosive
AH, ZE, BS, SB, MM, MR, ES, IS

Count 4 – Use + carry + explosive
AH, ZE, BS, SB, MM, MR, ES, IS

Count 5 – Attempted Murder of Officer of US
AH, ZE, BS, MM, MR, ES [?], IS [?]

Count 6 –
AH, ZE, BS, MM, MR,

Count 7 – Attempted Murder
AH, ZE, BS, MM, MR

Count 8 – Discharging Firearm in Violence
AH, ZE, BS, MM, MR

Count 9 – Discharging Firearm in Violence
AH, ZE, BS, MM, MR

Count 10 – Discharging Firearm in Violence
AH, ZE, BS, MM, MR

Count 11 – Corruptly Concealing Record
Daniel Estrada

Count 12 – Conceal document
MR, Daniel Estrada

Count
11 Corruptly concealing a record document.
Defendant acted knowingly
to conceal a document record used
by

[margin note: Again – what is the difference?]

Count
12 – Conspiracy to conceal document to
impair use in official proceeding

Charges - Aiding & Abetting each other
    chose to deliberately participate in the crime,
    Being present or spectator not guilty —
    had to purposefully voluntarily participated with
    intent to break the law
            accused had advance knowledge of plan for

Count 8, 9 + 10 – Using firearm

Verdict Forms:

Sep to separated by count
Count 1 - RIOT - Autumn Hill     Megan Morris
            Zach Evetts     Marcielle Rennde [?]
            Benjamin Song     Elizabeth Soto
            Savanah Batten     Inez Soto

Count 2 - Providing Material Support Terrorist
        AH      MM
        ZE      MR
        BS      ES
        SB      IS

Indictment: Charges (7)
Count 1. Aiding & Abetting Rioting
Committing Act of Violence in Rioting
Damage to any Property or Person
Provide Support or Resources to a Terrorist

Govt prove:

1. Defendant provided material support
   or resources to carry out terrorist act

Count 2. maliciously damage or
Defendant destroyed property of the United States
Defendant attempted to kill a person of the U.S.

Count 3. Conspiracy to use or carry an explosive to
commit a felony offense

Conspiracy to use explosive to incite a riot.

Count 4. Abet or conspire to
Use & carry of an explosive to commit
a felony

Count 5,6,7 Aiding & abetting
attempted murder of an officer of the U.S.
with malice (?) on branch of the U.S.
/kill deliberately

Judge could not pronounce word “malevolence” [?]
so spelled it out.

3-11-2026

30 plus people in Dallas courtroom

• first 3 charges
  Attempted Murder – NO NAMES
  Govt 75 min
  each Defe Atty 15 min
• Charge of Court [?]
  Govt → Transferred Intent Objection
  objection: Attempted offense requires specific intent
• Illogical
  → Content, not harm
  manslaughter apply or murder attempt apply

Defense
Estetts [?] concurs w/

1st Amendment DeRosa vs Lynauth [?] 817-259
[circled: Agreed Taken out]
pg 243 of that case, footnote 3
New evidence: “to incite riot” is not in the charge / Govt agrees to remove this.

Judge’s final ruling on charge of attempted
murder.

---

To jury – must all agree on verdict
Did Govt prove BEYOND A REASONABLE D[OUBT]

All of this was foreseeable.

Firearms, trauma packs.

[circled: Sotos & Batten not in Song’s inner circle,
so they aren’t charged w….
Govt didn’t over charge
weren’t in the 4th of July chat.]

In chat Song said, I won’t
back down.
The miracle that happened that
night. Cop lived. He returns
fire. He hit Songs rifle. (Which
is why rifle jams?).
Does Song flee? No, he tries to
clear it & when he can’t, he flees.
Because he can’t shoot any more. Why?
He intended to shoot all 60 rounds.
If that rifle hadn’t jammed, Song
wouldn’t be here.
Key: Both defendants absolutely
knew this would happen

Says he is Rueda’s partner. She
tells him my car is parked at
the 56th Street address. Everyone
is “staged” from 56th Street.
They left from there to go to P2.

She says TOW IT. Giving direction.
Like she has something to hide
Because 56th Street is where they
all staged from.

Shift from peaceful protest? Rueda
says she wants pots & pans, What were
they? Rifles, body armor, trauma packs,
[illegible]. They say “there’s a RAT”. Why?
Rats only tell on people who
do illegal things.
Have [?] phones, use analog radios, [illegible]
Why scouting, why need to know
how long gates stay open? For a legal
peaceful protest.
Why say we’re just walking? Why
not say we’ve been at a peaceful
protest?
They wanted the detainees to riot.
They shot fireworks AT the facility.
Why not just straight up rally [?]

Eveetts [?] texted about slashing
the tires. Eveets [?] only one wearing
knee pads on his pants.
Everyone wearing black – why?
To confuse people. That’s the
purpose. Officers couldn’t even
identify.

Sanchez – I contacted some of
the moms…. Why didn’t he say
people who come across
their names? Because he didn’t
want anyone to know. He knows
his wife has just been arrested.
Letter from 2017 [?] shows how long
he’s been with Mari.
Bunnie wasn’t at the house.
Wife is in jail & the most important
thing he needs to do is take an
insignificant boy?!
He says, Oh my god, my wife. It’s
bad. But he’s “visiting friends.” In
the box is writing from Inez Book Club.
It’s important because it connects
them all.
At Rueda’s house, all cleaned out.
He was at her house 5 1/2 hours.

You don’t get to say, I wasn’t the
one with a gun. They are all
part of the conspiracy to break
the law.

If you conspire to commit a crime,
you are guilty.

Some said, [illegible] was merely
present. Someone at a residence
near the facility could have come
out & seen what was happening. That person
the defendant wasn’t would be merely
merely present. They were present.
black blocked. They were in the
gear chat. Mari’s [?] invite people
got there. Sold [?] address, Hill [?]
lives there. Left her phone there.
2 AR15 rifles in the van. 13 people
all blacked out including Rose & Evil.
But no one knows who they are?
Why did Bauman talk about all the
others?

Talk about Sotos & Batten – 3 people
going down the road, come back, 30 seconds
before the shooting.

Song said get to the rifles before
cop pulled gun. Why did he say
that if there wasn’t a plan?

Atty
for
Inci [?]

Atty for
DLS

---

Govt Rebuttal –

Jury was asked to leave bias at
the door. Using reason & common sense.

Pinkerton (?) – Defendants say “I
didn’t shoot”, I didn’t slash tires – so
I’m not guilty.

Pinkerton – Planning to rob bank.
Person A – gives info about bank
Person C – says I’ll drive
Person B – says I’ll rob the bank, I’ll
have a gun. Security guards back off.
Winds up shooting guard.
Gets in car w/ Person A & B. Law says
they are part of conspiracy to break the
law

Danny went to Mari’s home
before she even talked to him.

What was found in the boxes
had NOTHING to do w/ July 4th!

Govt saying what was concealed
was hiding evidence.

[margin note: Search her home No [illegible]]

[margin note: she is afraid of guns]

They didn’t even show picture of
little fireworks (which actually [?]
did.) They show fires, drawings,
but NO behaviors consistent w/
She ran when she saw officer.
[illegible] she was GONE.

The reason they officers talked to
group was because they were wearing
black. They did not deblock [?].
She complied w/ officers.

Does her having fires, stickers, etc,
make her a terrorist? No. Her
behavior is not consistent with
a terrorist.

The FBI agent had to search
Google for a definition.

Did M plan violence?
Did she agree to commit a violent
crime?
Did she vandalize?
Did she fire a gun?
Did she hid evidence?

When detention officers came out,
they all left (ran). That’s not
a riot.

No one attacked detent ofcr.
No one tried to breach the facility.
How many calls about fireworks
resulted in a riot?

Officer/He seemed confused about why
anyone would be arrested for
fireworks.

Mari is terrified, won’t even
hold a gun. She said, when mention
of gun, she said “might be hot” –
hesitation.

No evidence Mari was part
of conspiracy for terror –
Terrorism, the law requires
knowledge & intent to commit
violence.

Guy who brought spray paint
did it on his own.

There was NO damage from
fireworks. They were at least 50 yds
away. If they wanted, they could
have done more w/ FW. But they did
not because that was not
their intent.

July 4 protest.

Her husband is saying – this
will be a safe protest.

She wasn’t in any Gear Chat
meetings, not in Gun Clubs, etc.
She just showed up at 7/4 protest
& got there later than everyone
else. People already firing firwr [?]
She has no gun, no clue that anyone
else had guns.

When det [?] officers she left when
she was asked.

Govt created this narrative
so had to arrest everyone there.

Mr & Mrs Soto wearing black.
When asked by officers to stop, they
stopped. Sotos were significantly
far away when officer was shot. They
had no clue. They weren’t
wearing masks, didn’t run from
police, no idea the shooting happened

Jury are only people who can stop
putting protestors in prison for being
tv [?] tourists [?]

[margin note: Liz Sotos [?]]

The Antifa “expert” admitted
this future might be enhanced
by this.
This is an experiment by
the Govt.

— Govt investigated her personal
life. Bank, home. Turned over
every stone. The only thing they
can prove [circled] she was at Pharrieland [?]

• [circled] she is in a Book club that
  the Govt hates.
  Govt is trying to associate DFW Antifa
  Twitter account w/ Sotos. Because
  they found passwords, but Govt didn’t
  try out the passwords.
  DFW Antifa list just 2023,
  some GBC started in 2016. Govt
  is saying the DFW Antifa info rebranded
  as EGBC [?]. Doesn’t make any
  sense.

Govt – They took printers to show pictures
because they hate what Sotos print.
But printers prove nothing.

Witnesses said they don’t see Liz at
protests. Usually just socially + at
Book Club. Surprising she was at

[NOTE: Page 27 is a duplicate of Page 26 — identical source image file.]

Danny went to Mari’s home
before she even talked to him.
What was found in the boxes
had NOTHING to do w/ July 4th!
Govt saying what was [circled] concealed
was hiding evidence.
[margin note: searched her home. No guns [?]]
[margin note: she is afraid of guns]
They didn’t even show picture of
little fireworks (which actually [?]
did.) They show fires, drawings,
but NO behaviors consistent w/
She ran when she saw officer.
[illegible] she was GONE.
The reason they officers talked to
group was because they were wearing
Black. They did not De-block [?].
She complied w/ officers.
Does her having zines, stickers, etc,
make her a terrorist? No. Her
behavior is not consistent with
a terrorist.
The FBI agent had to search
Google for a definition.
Did M plan violence?
Did she agree to commit a violent
Did she vandalize? crime?
Did she fire a gun?
Did she hid evidence?

When detention officers came out,
they all left (ran). That’s not
a riot.
No one attacked Detent. officers [?]
No one tried to breach the facility.
How many calls about fireworks
resulted in a riot?
Officer/He seemed confused about why
anyone would be arrested for
fireworks.
Mari is terrified, won’t even
hold a gun. She said, when mention
of gun, she said “might be hot” —
hesitation.
No evidence Mari was part
of conspiracy for Terrorism [?]
Terrorism, the law requires
knowledge + intent to commit
violence.
Guy who brought spray paint
did it on his own.
There was NO damage from
fireworks. They were at least 50 yds
away. If they wanted, they could
have done more w/ FW. But they did
not because that was not
their intent.

Govt has burden of proving guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt, you
must acquit.
Only evidence shows [illegible]
went to Pharrieland [?] for a demonstration [?]

Atty
Morris

Atty Orozco [?]
of Mari [?]
” Pots + Pans, people yelling, so people
I’m interested in people seeing us +
hearing us” — Govt read all
texts around the chats. But not this.
Shows her intent! What does she
have in her hand at BL [?] a megaphone.
She participated to give hope to
detainees. She could not foresee
any violence. Govt calls this a
riot – has to be intent to cause violence.
No witness has said that was [?]
any plan for violence. All said
they planned a noise demonstration.
Mari felt betrayed because [?]
it ended the way it did. Because
that was not the plan.

pamphlet in the photo
Searched car. Found debit card,
health ins card, phone.
Looking for evidence. If you
don’t find it in home, car, on person,
it probably doesn’t exist.
Phone mapping shows 7/3, midnight
all day, she is at home. 7/3 was
day of gear chat. Next day, stayed
at home until 8:37 AM, left home +
went to work. Panera Bread, Lake Worth.
until 5 pm. Then home. Soto [?] picked
her up at 9:42 pm, went to Prairie Lane [?].
Photo of fireworks (!) 50-100 yards
away from the facility. Batten went
to demonstration in spot 51-100 yards [?]
away. Commercial fireworks, water,
sparklers.
Common sense – Can see fireworks
were commercial, not the kind to
blow things up.
This is a trial w/in a trial.
Case of each defendant should be
considered separately.
Only 4 counts apply to Batten.

Savanna
atty We don’t prosecute people for
political beliefs. Savanna on
trial for participating in
a noise protest on 7/4.
Ask you to follow the evidence.
Batten in jail for 4 days when
FBI searched her apt. 7/5 an amazon
pkg, which shows she planned to
be there or lived there.
Searched apt for 57 min. Broke
a [?] window + broke door. Only thing
they took from apt was a map. Only
thing. Map for No Kings protest in
Oct 2025.
Search on her phone. 295 photos.
Out of 295 photos, was there anything
that connected her to a planned ambush
on 7/4. He said NO. Only damaging
piece of evidence “they could find
on her phone was of the Emma Goldman
Book club. Govt pointed to this
because 3 of the defendants were
in the photo. But there were 14
people in the photo. Govt says
this was them planning
ambush. They were reading a

Kent said when prosecutor doesn’t
have actual evidence, try to overwhelm
jury – showed chats over & over.

Song was a yellow vest at [?] him [?]. Taught
people to defend themselves

Govt takes away rights when they
don’t like politics.

---

Guns at protest are for protection.
So Defensive – all chats, not about [?]
offensive.
Sometimes police do the wrong
thing. Song could watch someone
get killed or he could take action
(be prepared).
Played video of firing guns [?] → 1 second
Rifle aiming at the ground. Its [?],
how can someone w/ gun facing
ground be trying to kill someone?

Only Bullet found, Govt couldn’t
identify. It slowed down. What
causes: Ricochet.

Officer saying, I’m going to pop your
ass.

Side of gun was facing Gross.
2000 pictures, + not one single photo
of gun shots on ground. No gun shots
to ANYTHING except ground.

Seth Sykes – whole life felt marginalized.
Surprised when shot rang [?] out. Even [?]
the shooter was surprised.

gun? Or does it sound like
a panicked action?

Plan + what happened are
subjective. [illegible], …

Use common sense. Behavior of
everyone instead of Bauman + Song
was peaceful. Bauma [?] showed
up on his own, lied, becomes
the Govt star witness.

[margin note: Def atty go Song] Govt asks why? and then
tells you the answer.
7/4 well meaning people.
Afraid of the police, leary [?] of
law enforcement. When police show up,
they are aggressive.
w/ wagon [?] in designated protest area
w/ water, holding flashlights
with reflective tape [?].
Protestor didn’t run or hide. He
was on the road. Not definition of
the ambush [?]. There were no shots
until Lt. Gross got there + pulled
guns [?].

pressure. Only 2 people in the
parking lot. Elect was further
away.

RIOT charge fails.
F works peacefully against all [?]
of detainees. Separate from Nalu

• Sykes vandalizing.

None of the defendants used the term
Antifa to identify themselves.
Every state witness, 5 of them,
called to tell Govt approved story.
Saw how they acted when faced w/
telling the truth instead of a
crt interrogation room.

Propaganda — all of it painful
to possess. Govt doesn’t like it.
Showed all the guns they were
owned lawfully.
Why did Govt show all this?
3 attempted murders. Plan to
kill 3 people why would Song be
only one w/ gun in hand?
All other guns locked in cars.
Planned murder to start
shooting only when Gross pulled