Defense is now beginning their closing arguments.
Defense begins by saying "if the cost of speech or assembly is being locked up in a cage, that speech is meaningless." He goes on to say that speaking out and taking action is the only way we make progress. He brings up Ruby Bridges and various Freedom Fighters from the '60's and continues to say that the Freedom Fighters were the driving force behind the de-segregation of our public schools. He listed out a few examples of direct action they took, and how it also helped to amplify and advance the public debate about justice. He said the defendant was there "to advocate for change, and refused to shrink in the face of police threats."
Defense highlighted once again how universities are public spaces, and the garage gave no indication that anyone from the public couldn't enter. He says the defendant had no reason to believe that "the police subjectively closed it off to the public" and there is zero evidence that she knew.
Defense: you saw the video. the police said "you're trespassing" to someone at one point and protesters said "no we're not."
Defense says that regardless of who was right you get an idea of the mental state they were in. They were exercising their constitutional rights and standing up for what they believe in.
He adds that even if they did hear it, that statement was wrong, they weren't trespassing. He said that commands from the police were not a legal order, but rather a "raw display of authority"