San Jose prosecutors charged three suspects with felony assault after a daylight beating of two Israeli-Americans, but they did not bring hate crime counts while the county says the investigation continues.
Two Israeli-American victims were assaulted while speaking Hebrew near a downtown San Jose restaurant, and the attack was captured on video. Authorities arrested three people and filed felony assault charges, but prosecutors stopped short of labeling the case a hate crime at this stage.
The defendants are identified as Bruneil Henry Chamaki, Roma Akoyans, and Ramon Akoyans, and the attack was recorded on March 8. Video of the incident shows a brutal, public confrontation that quickly drew attention and outrage from witnesses.
Witnesses at the scene reported that some attackers spoke Farsi and that slurs were used, including the phrase “f**k Jews,” according to initial accounts. Those onlookers say the barrage of blows and the language used made the assault feel targeted, which has fueled criticism of the charging decision.
The County of Santa Clara issued a public notice saying prosecutors continue to investigate the incident and that the charges filed do not presently include hate crime allegations. Officials stressed the investigation remains active as they gather evidence and interview witnesses to determine the motive and appropriate charges.
District Attorney Jeff Rosen issued a statement emphasizing swift accountability for street violence, saying, “We won’t tolerate pummeling a victim on the ground in front of a restaurant or anywhere, and we will hold the perpetrators fully accountable.” “Our public spaces have to be safe for all to enjoy without fear.”
Those sentences from the DA underscore a focus on public safety and prosecutorial duty, but they also leave open questions about how motive is proved under the law. Hate crime enhancements typically require clear evidence that the attack was driven by bias against a protected characteristic, and prosecutors told the public they are still sorting through that standard as the case develops.
From a law-and-order perspective, people want to see charges that match the conduct and the apparent context, and filing decisions hinge on what investigators can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The absence of hate crime counts so far has prompted frustration among community members who point to the video and witness statements as indicators of targeted violence.
Local community leaders and residents have demanded transparency about the investigative timeline and an explanation of the legal thresholds used to decline hate crime charges for now. As the district attorney’s office continues to review evidence, the legal process will determine whether the current assault charges remain alone or are later supplemented with additional counts.
Court dates, further witness interviews, and any forensic or digital evidence review will shape the prosecution’s next moves, and the case will proceed through the criminal justice system according to normal procedures. The public will be watching how investigators reconcile on-the-ground testimony, video material, and the legal standard for hate-motivated offenses as the matter moves forward.
