A federal jury in Fort Worth, Texas, convicted eight people on terrorism-related charges in connection with a shooting outside the Prairieland Detention Center last summer, federal prosecutors said at trial. The case, which included nearly three weeks of testimony before U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman, hinged on whether prosecutors could link the incident to antifa and its alleged operational planning. One defendant was also found guilty of attempted murder after prosecutors tied him to the initial gunfire outside the facility, which wounded a police officer.
Prosecutors said the violence followed planning by people they connected to antifa, a label used for far-left militant groups that confront or resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations. Defense attorneys, however, told the jury that there were no antifa ties and that the events were a demonstration with fireworks that turned into gunshots. The jury reached its verdict as the Justice Department framed the case as part of a broader effort to disrupt antifa under terrorism statutes.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said the government would pursue more outcomes like this one as the Trump administration dismantles antifa. Speaking after the verdict, Bondi said, “Today’s verdict on terrorism charges will not be the last as the Trump administration systematically dismantles Antifa and finally halts their violence on America’s streets.” The Justice Department also described the incident as an attack plotted by antifa operatives.
During trial, the government’s theories included the idea that bringing firearms, first aid kits and wearing body armor reflected nefarious intent, and that the group used “antifa tactics” and was focused on “operational security,” according to testimony presented by prosecutors. Defense lawyers argued that there was no call or plan for violence before the shooting and that people who brought firearms did so for their own protection, not as part of an ambush.
Suzanne Adely, interim president of the National Lawyers Guild, criticized the case as a test of how far prosecutors could go in targeting protesters through terrorism laws. Adely said, “That opposition is something that the government wants to squash so a case like this helps the government kind of see how far they can go in criminalizing constitutionally protected protests and also helps them kind of intimidate, increase the fear, hoping that folks in other cities then will think twice over protesting.” She said the charges and their outcome could have wider consequences for protest activity.
The trial centered on what happened outside the detention center in Alvarado as guards from the facility came out and several people moved away before the shots were fired, according to the defense. Prosecutors said Benjamin Song, described as a former U.S. Marine Corps reservist, yelled “get to the rifles” and opened fire, striking Alvarado Police Lt. Thomas Gross, who testified that he was shot with a round that entered his shoulder and exited his neck.
Although prosecutors said Song fired the initial shots, the government also charged several other protesters with attempted murder and discharging a firearm. The jury found those additional defendants not guilty on those counts, while convicting others on terrorism-related charges. Song’s attorney, Phillip Hayes, argued during closing arguments that there was not a call to arms before Gross arrived and suggested that Song’s shots were “suppressive fire,” while also arguing that a ricochet bullet hit the officer.
The ninth defendant, Daniel Sanchez Estrada, faced different charges tied to documents. The jury found him guilty of corruptly concealing a document and conspiracy to conceal documents. His attorney, Christopher Weinbel, said after the verdict that he could not believe jurors “came to this conclusion,” and said he believed his client’s military service “meant something.” Weinbel added, “But I feel like it turned its back on justice with this. … The U.S. lost today with this verdict,” according to the proceedings.
Leading up to the trial, some people pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists after being accused of supporting antifa. Several of those witnesses testified for the prosecution, including Seth Sikes, who told the jury he went to the detention center to “bring some joy to those held inside” and said, “I felt like I was doing the right thing.”
The terrorism charges in this case followed a Trump administration order last fall to designate antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, according to the reporting. Prosecutors said the terrorism case did not require prosecutors to show an affiliation with a single organization, and the government’s approach was framed as distinctive in part because domestic terrorism prosecutions can draw on conduct tied to domestic groups within the protections of the First Amendment.