During a preliminary hearing in a Denver federal courtroom, federal authorities shared testimony indicating that Mohamed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national accused of participating in the June 1 terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, had targeted pro-Israel marchers with the intent to kill Zionists. The suspect, 45, faces multiple charges, including attempted first-degree murder, first-degree assault, and possession of incendiary devices, stemming from the attack that injured 12 people. The incident, which involved the use of Molotov cocktails, targeted groups the suspect identified as Zionists, based on his belief that they occupied Palestine, specifically Israel and Jerusalem.
FBI agent Timothy Chan, who interviewed Soliman, testified that the suspect had conducted an online search for ‘Zionist events’ in Boulder, which led him to the pro-Israel group Run for Their Lives. Investigators discovered that the suspect had the number 1187, representing the year Israel was liberated by Muslims, on clothing and other items in his car. This detail, along with his use of Israeli flags to mark potential victims, suggests a calculated effort to identify and attack those he considered enemies.
During the hearing, Soliman’s defense attorney, David Kraut, pointed out the suspect’s differentiation between Zionists and Jews, highlighting ambiguity in defining the term. He argued that Soliman’s definition of Zionism hinged on political views rather than national origin, and that the hate crime statute did not apply in this case. Magistrate Judge Kathryn Starnella acknowledged the complexity of the legal issue, noting that while there was evidence suggesting national origin was a motivating factor, it was ultimately a matter for the jury to determine. The court expressed support for moving forward with the case, recognizing the significance of the suspect’s actions and the need for a clear legal understanding of what constitutes a hate crime.
American citizens and media outlets have shown significant interest in the case, with coverage highlighting the broader implications on legal interpretation and the role of hate crime statutes in U.S. law. The Boulder attack not only underscores the risks of lone-wolf radicalization but also raises questions about how society defines and prosecutes such acts. The case is set to continue with an arraignment and detention hearing on June 27, with the suspect remaining in custody while awaiting further legal proceedings.