The Prosecution Just Put a Witness on the Stand Who Helped Adrian Gonzales

Sometimes the most important moments in a trial aren't the ones the prosecution planned for. Today was one of those moments.

Erin Robin took the stand as a prosecution witness. She's a second-grade teacher who was at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022. Her classroom was in the D Wing, separate from the fourth-grade building where the shooting occurred. She had a wall of windows facing that direction.

The prosecution wanted her testimony to establish that Adrian Gonzales was on scene, visible to teachers, during the shooting. They got that. But they got something else too. Something that helps the defense.

What Robin Actually Testified

Robin described the terror of that day. She heard gunshots. She gathered her students in a corner. She flipped desks over to create a makeshift barrier. And then she said something that should make every juror think twice about the prosecution's theory.

That's not a teacher in a different building feeling safe while police stood around doing nothing. That's a teacher who believed the gunfire was coming her direction. Through her wall of glass. Any moment.

Then she crawled to her classroom door and looked out the window. She saw a white UCISD patrol car. She saw an officer moving around it, using it for cover. She thought, "The good guys are here. The police are here. We're going to be okay."

That officer was Adrian Gonzales.

The Geography Matters

Here's what the prosecution doesn't want you to think about too hard: Where was Gonzales positioned?

He was between Robin's classroom and the fourth-grade building. Between her and the shooter. In the same zone where she felt bullets might come through her windows at any moment.

If Robin, in a separate wing, felt she was in mortal danger from the direction of that building, what does that tell you about where Gonzales was standing?

The prosecution says he should have advanced toward the gunfire. The defense says he was already in the line of fire, trying to assess a chaotic situation. Robin's testimony, inadvertently, supports the defense.

LaHood's Cross Made It Explicit

Defense attorney Nico LaHood didn't miss the opportunity. He walked Robin through the geography. He established that Gonzales drove onto the campus toward the danger while other officers stayed back. He got Robin to confirm that the officer she saw was positioned between her and the fourth-grade building.

He asked if she knew there were other officers who stayed outside, away from the danger. She didn't know that. But now the jury does.

The picture that emerges isn't a coward hiding while children died. It's an officer who drove into the danger zone, positioned himself in an exposed area, and was reacting to an active, unfolding threat.

The Systemic Failures

LaHood also used Robin to highlight everything that failed before Gonzales ever arrived. One or two lockdown drills per year. No full-time school resource officer at the elementary school while the high school had one. School-issued magnet strips that kept doors unlocked. A wall of windows that made Robin feel like a sitting duck.

None of that is Gonzales's fault. The system was broken long before that day.

What This Means

The prosecution's burden is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Gonzales endangered children. Today, their own witness described a scene where Gonzales was in danger himself, reacting to a threat that was so immediate and directional that a teacher in a separate building thought she was about to die.

That's not endangering children. That's a man in the line of fire.

The state is trying to hold one officer accountable for a systemic failure involving nearly 400 officers. Today's testimony didn't help their case. It helped his.

▶️ WATCH NOW Prosecution's Own Witness Describes Gonzales Taking Cover in the Line of Fire

Watch the testimony yourself. Listen to what Robin actually said. Then ask yourself: Does this sound like a man who endangered children, or a man who was responding to danger alongside everyone else?

The jury will have to answer that question. Today's testimony gave them reason to doubt the prosecution's narrative.