Jury deliberates in trial of 9 charged in Prairieland ICE center shooting
The jury will resume deliberations Friday morning in U.S. District Court in Fort Worth in the trial of nine defendants charged in connection with a July 4 shooting that wounded an Alvarado police lieutenant outside ICE’s Prairieland Detention Center.
The jury began deliberating at 9 a.m. Thursday and stopped for the day shortly before 5 p.m. Deliberations will continue until jurors reach a unanimous verdict on all the charges against each of the nine defendants.
Notes from the jury
Physical evidence in the case has been made available for the jurors to review. The jury was mistakenly given a flash drive that contained additional video footage from the shooting that was not shown during the trial. Attorneys agreed to play portions of the video, and only those portions were supposed to be included on the flash drive.
Judge Mark Pittman brought the jury foreperson into the courtroom to ask whether jurors had watched the videos. The foreperson said they had not watched any footage that was not previously shown in the courtroom, and the judge said it seemed like a harmless error. The jury was then given the correct flash drive. The judge later questioned all jurors about the erroneously included footage and told them to disregard it.
On Thursday morning, the jury also sent notes asking for clarification of organized rioting charges in the case, and transcripts of testimony from cooperating witnesses Susan Kent and Lynette Sharp, who pleaded guilty and testified about the actions of the other defendants. Judge Pittman denied those requests and directed the jury to continue deliberating based on previous instructions.
On Wednesday, the judge read the more than 90 pages of instructions to the jurors for them to use in their deliberations on each of the 65 charges.
The jury also has asked to see evidence including an “Antifa handbook” and the handbook for the Emma Goldman Book Club, a club to discuss anarchist literature to which some of the defendants belonged.
Closing arguments
Defense attorneys sparred with prosecutors Wednesday during emotional closing arguments over the defendants’ alleged roles in the shooting outside the North Texas detention center, where the government holds immigrants who were awaiting deportation.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Shawn Smith, the case’s lead prosecutor, opened up the final remarks by talking to the jury for nearly 50 minutes, arguing one last time that the defendants showed up at the detention center with the intention to kill and to cause havoc.
The defendants are facing a mix of charges, which include attempted murder, rioting, conspiracy to use explosives, using explosives, and providing material support to terrorists.
The prosecution and defense attorneys have argued throughout the three-week trial over the extent of the involvement of each individual on July 4. Smith says eight of the nine defendants were at the ICE facility in Alvarado with fireworks, rifles and explosives, dressed in all black to organize an “ambush” and to destroy government property.
Attorneys for the defendants say it was supposed to be a peaceful noise demonstration turned wrong when an officer was shot during an altercation with a protester.
Smith told the jury Wednesday that the defendants orchestrated an “attack” in an attempt to liberate immigrants who were awaiting deportation. He said they shot fireworks at the building, slashed tires of government vehicles, trespassed on private property and brought first-aid kits and body armor — all which show intent more severe than just peaceful protesting, he argued.
“Did you know fireworks burn at 1,500 degrees?” Smith asked the jury. “That is not a peaceful protest — to fire something that burns at 1,500 degrees at a building holding prisoners.”
Smith also told the jury that no damage had to be done to the building for it to be clear that the defendants intended to do something illegal.
The prosecution displayed dozens of items of evidence in front of the jury, including guns that were found during home searches and an antifa flag. Antifa is short for anti-fascist and often a term for left-wing militant groups that participate in politically-charged demonstrations. Last year President Donald Trump issued an executive order designating antifa as a domestic terrorist organization. The federal government has called the North Texas case the first against an alleged antifa cell.
Defense attorneys have argued that antifa is an ideology and not a formal organization to which the defendants belong.
“They’re here asking you guys to put protesters in prison as terrorists,” Blake Burns, a defense attorney for defendant Elizabeth Soto, said to the jury.
Teams of attorneys for the defendants were each given 15 minutes to speak. The defense did not call any witnesses during the trial, instead focusing on making their case through cross-examination of prosecution witnesses and closing arguments.
Warren St. John, the defense attorney for Meagan Morris, who is listed in the indictment as Bradford Morris, shared a similar sentiment with the jury. He asked his client to stand up for the jurors to see her, showing the jury how emotional she was. The defense has said that Morris never got out of her van during the protest.
“People who are guilty don’t cry,” St. John said. “She cries because she’s scared of getting punished for something she didn’t do. I know my client will be found not guilty.”
Smith played video that he said shows Benjamin Song, the defendant who is accused of shooting the officer, shouting, “Get to the rifles!” when the officer got out of his vehicle. Phillip Hayes, the attorney for Song, said there is evidence that shows the bullet that struck Lt. Thomas Gross was a ricochet and Song did not have a gun in his hands until one was pointed at him.
“Ben was scared of the police officers but did not have any intent to hurt or shoot anyone that night,” Hayes said. “Intent to murder is a clear attempt to end a life. This is not what this was.”
Attorneys for each of the defendants pleaded with the jury to understand that the night of July 4 began as a way to peacefully support those detained at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility, who the defendants believe are a marginalized community. They say the goal was to light fireworks next to the facility on July 4 to offer the detainees a glimmer of entertainment.
Another key sticking point for each of the defense attorneys was a social media account the prosecution said went from an Antifa DFW account to a book club page, claiming it was changed as a disguise. But Burns, the attorney for Elizabeth Soto, said that determination only came about because of a post-it note with log-in information found in Soto’s apartment.
“Elizabeth Soto has a book club that everybody hates,” Burns told the jury. “They want to associate this Antifa DFW Twitter account to the book club account because of a post-it note. The book club account was started in 2016. The last post on the DFW account was posted in 2023. So what else does the prosecution have wrong?”
The nine defendants face a variety of charges, with some involved in what the prosecution described as a “July 4 planning” group chat on Signal, a messaging app where all messages are fully encrypted. Smith said the government was lucky to even get access to the messages given the app’s security measures.
Smith also said the defendants arrived at the ICE facility on July 4 wearing all black clothing and practiced antifa techniques to avoid detection when leaving the scene. Defense attorneys pushed back on notion, saying most of the protesters left when they were told it was private property.
A group of the defendants were stopped by police after leaving the ICE facility, and Smith described the group to the jury as “cool as a cucumber” for people who just witnessed the shooting of a police officer. Defense attorneys said that group left before the shooting and had no idea that anyone was hurt.
“Well, most people are cool as a cucumber when they haven’t done anything wrong,” said Leigh Davis, the defense attorney for Ines Soto, who is among the defendants who were stopped by police officers after leaving the ICE facility.
Lt. Gross, the officer who was shot on July 4, suffered the shot in his upper shoulder, but it avoided vital organs and exited through the back of his neck, he testified earlier in the trial.
The defendants, charges and sentencing range
Other than Song, Morris, Elizabeth Soto and Ines Soto, the defendants are Autumn Hill, who is referred to as Cameron Arnold in the indictment, Savanna Batten, Maricela Rueda, Zachary Evetts and Daniel Rolando Sanchez Estrada.
Song is charged with attempted murder and discharging a firearm during, in relation to and in furtherance of a crime of violence. Evetts, Hill, Morris and Rueda face the same attempted murder and firearm charges because they are accused of aiding and abetting Song.
Song, Batten, Evetts, Hill, Morris, Rueda, and Elizabeth and Ines Soto were also charged with rioting, providing material support to terrorists, and conspiracy to use and carry and explosives.
Rueda and Sanchez Estrada also are charged with conspiracy to conceal documents, and Sanchez Estrada is charged with corruptly concealing a document or record.
Sanchez Estrada was not at Prairieland on the night of the shooting. Prosecutors allege that while she was in jail, his wife, Rueda, asked him to hide a box of “insurrectionary, anarchist, hating-the-government material,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Smith said.
Sanchez Estrada’s attorney, Christopher Weinbel, said the box was filled with letters and documents that belonged to his client and had nothing to do with the case.
Five additional defendants in the case pleaded guilty to federal charges and testified at the trial, including two who said they helped Song escape after the shooting. Song was arrested about a week later.
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, if they’re convicted, Song, Evetts, Hill, Morris and Rueda could face between 10 years and life in federal prison. Batten and Elizabeth and Ines Soto could face 10 to 50 years. Sanchez Estrada faces up to 20 years on each count.
The nine defendants also face state charges, on which they will be tried at a later date.
Staff writers Emerson Clarridge and Lillie Davidson contributed to this report.
This story was originally published March 11, 2026 at 9:58 PM.
