Offences Admitted but 'Not Guilty'

Doug99 · 27 Apr 2021

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56853979

Having admitted the offences and pleading 'Not Guilty', the judge rules there was no defence in law for their actions, but a sympathetic jury finds them 'Not Guilty'.

This will open the floodgates for further disruptions and vandalism.

danechip · 27 Apr 2021

Oh god. I hate them as much as Greta

noseall · 27 Apr 2021

danechip said:
Oh god. I hate them as much as Greta

I'm not sure Greta does hate them.

danechip · 27 Apr 2021

You might have a point there....

danechip · 27 Apr 2021

Lets burn them all using fossil fuels.

IT Minion · 27 Apr 2021

This is the danger of facing a jury of your peers. Sometimes they'll decide to ignore the details of the law and go for what they think is right.

The majority of the UK sees climate change as a big problem. It's hard to go with a guilty verdict when you think someone's right.

danechip · 27 Apr 2021

No global warming this month Minion brrrr

motorbiking · 28 Apr 2021

For more serious offences, where the Jury returns a perverse verdict, they can go for a retrial. It doesn't stop the injured party bringing a private prosecution against them for the damages. I'm sure the CPS will cooperate to allow that.

ellal · 28 Apr 2021

So what do people want, bring in 'Judge Dredd'?

There is the defence of committing a crime in order to prevent a greater crime...

"Prosecutor Diana Wilson had told the court that while some protesters merely stood outside the building holding banners or speaking through megaphones"

Well that will soon become illegal given the crime bill currently being whisked through parliament!

motorbiking · 28 Apr 2021

ellal said:
There is the defence of committing a crime in order to prevent a greater crime...

No, there really isn't. There is a defence if you are protecting property, but I doubt the "climate" would meet the meaning of Section 5 of the act? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/section/5

ellal · 28 Apr 2021

motorbiking said:
No, there really isn't.

Interestingly...

"Two anti-war activists have been cleared of charges of criminal damage for entering a BAE arms factory with the intention of "disarming" Typhoon jets bound for Saudi Arabia.
Sam Walton, a Quaker activist, and Daniel Woodhouse, a Methodist minister, were arrested after breaking into a BAE Systems airbase in Warton, Lancashire, in late January.
They faced Burnley magistrates' court on Wednesday (27/10/2017) and were found not guilty of criminal damage."

"In his judgment, District Judge James Clarke praised the men and said: "They were impressive and eloquent men who held strong views about what they were doing and what wanted to achieve.
"They impressed me as being natural in their delivery and honest throughout their evidence... heard about their belief of BAE’s role in the supply of aircraft to Saudi Arabia."
He added: "however having considered in full the defence under section five of the Criminal Damage Act 1971, I find the defendants not guilty.”

motorbiking · 29 Apr 2021

ellal said:
Interestingly...

"Two anti-war activists have been cleared of charges of criminal damage for entering a BAE arms factory with the intention of "disarming" Typhoon jets bound for Saudi Arabia.

The cases are really very different.

Offences Admitted but 'Not Guilty'

Similar threads