What the Prairieland Jury Never Got to Hear
Lawyers for an anti-ICE protester tried to argue his shot was a ricochet. The theory was squashed by gaps in the evidence and a judge’s suppression. The post What the Prairieland Jury Never Got to Hear appeared first on The Intercept .
On the final day of the Prairieland trial, where nine Texas protesters faced charges including providing material support to terrorists, an unexpected twist emerged. Benjamin Song, the activist on trial for allegedly shooting at a police officer, had his defense attorney, Phillip Hayes, raise a critical point that could have altered the case entirely.
Hayes pointed out that Song never aimed his weapon directly at the officer, contradicting the government's narrative. Relying on the prosecution's evidence - a poorly lit photo of the bullet, witness testimony, and CCTV footage, Hayes argued that Song fired the gun at the ground, and the ricochet struck the officer, explaining the dust visible in the video.
Despite this compelling argument, the jury did not acquit Song; instead, they convicted him and sentenced him to 100 years in prison.
Written by urgent.news from The Intercept's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
This story
This is one outlet's version. Read the fullest account.
- What the Prairieland Jury Never Got to Hear theintercept.com
