Jury selected for Jason Eaton trial; opening arguments due Monday
Eaton faces three counts of attempted second-degree murder in the November 2023 shooting of three Palestinian students in Burlington.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 10, 2026, 7:47 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 10, 2026, 7:47 p.m. ETFirst report
Jury selected in Jason Eaton trial; opening arguments due Monday
A jury has been selected for the trial of Jason Eaton, with opening arguments due Monday, according to vtdigger.org. The proceeding is at the charging stage, and the case is being handled in Chittenden County by the State's Attorney, vtdigger.org reported. The matter remains undecided and has not been resolved.
The government alleges that Eaton shot and wounded three Palestinian students in Burlington in November 2023, according to vtdigger.org. He faces three counts of attempted second-degree murder, the outlet reported.
The charge carries a statutory maximum of up to life in prison without parole, according to vtdigger.org. That is the maximum the charge carries, not a sentence.
The charges are allegations. Eaton has not been convicted, and he is presumed innocent.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 23:52current
First published.
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 23:47current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.