Edward Colston statue: Four cleared of criminal damage

Status
Not open for further replies.
festive

festive

Joined
31 Aug 2005
Messages
4,064
Reaction score
369
Country
United Kingdom
I imagine (no dont festive!!!) a few people on here fwappin themselves silly over this result. Personally i find it wrong in every way, this sets a precedent as usual for the offended to get away with anything.
The irony being here i believe no doubt some non white/pink people may believe the only reason they got off conviction was due to their colour i mean non colour no wait im confusing myself now ;)

People in the town could have lobbied their Mayor who'm i am sure would have perfectly understood the issues here and arranged to have this statue removed and placed in a museum etc in the correct way.




https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-59727161

Four people accused of illegally removing a statue of Edward Colston have been cleared of criminal damage.

Sage Willoughby, Rhian Graham, Milo Ponsford and Jake Skuse were charged after a monument to the 17th Century slave trader was pulled down and thrown into Bristol's harbourside last June.

It happened during a Black Lives Matter protest in the city.

Loud cheers erupted in the public gallery of Bristol Crown Court as the verdicts were returned.

The defendants, who are all from Bristol apart from Mr Ponsford, 26, who is based in Hampshire, laughed and hugged supporters who were waiting outside after they were released.
 
Sponsored Links
It's interesting that you found the need to start another thread on this issue rather than participate in the existing thread.
But you are right, you are confused.

festive said:
.. im confusing myself now
Click to expand...


festive said:
People in the town could have lobbied their Mayor who'm i am sure would have perfectly understood the issues here and arranged to have this statue removed and placed in a museum etc in the correct way.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what happened over a period of about then years, but the 'review' process stalled on words to be used on an additional plaque to correct history.

So as usual your confusion causes you to arrive at the wrong conclusion.
 
AngleEyes said:
Which is exactly what happened over a period of about then years, but the 'review' process stalled on words to be used on an additional plaque to correct history.

So as usual your confusion causes you to arrive at the wrong conclusion.
Click to expand...

Can you provide a link to a vote or where this happened? I don't believe the public were asked for it to be removed bar a few independent twitter polls or radio phone ins.

What actually happened is a labour MP put forward a planning application to add a second plaque.
 
Sponsored Links
^woody^ said:
It's an illogical and bizarre verdict when looked at dispassionately.
Click to expand...

In the same way that it would be illogical and bizarre to insist on retaining on public display a statue of a noted beneficiary from the slave trade in 21st Century Britain, set among thousands of people descended from slaves.
 
As per the other thread, I don’t think the judgement correct.

the argument seems to be venerating a slave trader is a higher crime than protestors ripping it down.

and or, democracy failed because the statue was still there.

as opposed to seeing criminal damage as a crime on its own.
 
Ferdinand Porsche was not a despot.

If he had been, would his car design be enough to excuse his other activities, so that statues of him should be retained in, say, Warsaw and Coventry?
 
So you think that statues of "Adolph" should be retained in Warsaw and Coventry?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links

Similar threads

S
blockage/damage on private sewer pipe
Replies
6
Views
3K
Hugh Jaleak
Hugh Jaleak
B
Condensing Boiler Break Down In The Big Freeze? Here's Why.
2 3
Replies
30
Views
5K
boozercruiser
B
Back
Top