Edward Colston statue: Four cleared of criminal damage

[transam]

The Russians are attempting to re write history

they banned that organisation that was highlighting Stalin’s purges

the mad mullahs in Iran have a monument to that fruit cake who took over from the shah he bumped off thousands

mao in China another fruit cake who bumped off a good few

 

[cwhaley]

Unfortunately there's no getting into some people the idea of historical context is invariably outdated, and historical acts need to be considered in modern moral and ethical terms.

Historical context is not outdated at all -- it's a tool all historians use to interpret historical figures and events. My former lecturers all instilled in me the importance of it and any relevant scholar I have listed to have expressed this too. Judging the past using morals from 400 years into the future is wrong and foolish.

As I've said, the statue's existence should have been opened up to a public forum and vote. Civilised people do that.

 

[AngleEyes]

..And the UK was one of the early ones to ban slavery.

And was Colston in any way influential for that?

 

[festive]

Many a true word said in jest, so spot on.

May we eternally hang our non coloured heads in shame until such time. Oh no wait apparently some of us turn gammon pink(of colour) when we try to speak out in debate, but again this has been transposed into racist association to which the woke disciple sheep stupidly swallow and regurgitate.

 

[AngleEyes]

Historical context is not outdated at all -- it's a tool all historians use to interpret historical figures and events. My former lecturers all instilled in me the importance of it and any relevant scholar I have listed to have expressed this too. Judging the past using morals from 400 years into the future is wrong and foolish.

As I've said, the statue's existence should have been opened up to a public forum and vote. Civilised people do that.

I agree, for historians viewing historical events in the historical context in which those events occurred is acceptable.
To try to apply the norms. morals and ethics of those times, and declare such events to be acceptable, in modern context is not a valid argument.
Otherwise executing Queens, torturing and burning witches, etc would be deemed acceptable. They were not acceptable by todays standards. And anyone who wants to argue they are acceptable events by todays standards would need a lot more history lessons.

Let us consider the intention of erecting statues: to stir the emotions and memories of the actions of the individual depicted.

Colston certainly did that, but mainly because there was a false narrative attached to the statue.
If that false narrative had been corrected, I'm pretty confident the statue would still be standing, unscathed.

 

[AngleEyes]

Many a true word said in jest, so spot on.

May we eternally hang our non coloured heads in shame until such time. Oh no wait apparently some of us turn gammon pink(of colour) when we try to speak out in debate, but again this has been transposed into racist association to which the woke disciple sheep stupidly swallow and regurgitate.

Your attempt to turn this discussion into a us versus them is not only misplaced, it's downright racist and you're trying to promote that divide.
One doesn't need to be any particular ethnicity to know that slavery is an abomination.

 

[AngleEyes]

why dont we have a statue of the person that signed that ban

Why don't we have a statue depicting the many thousands that were enslaved?

 

[fillyboy]

Why don't we have a statue depicting the many thousands that were enslaved?

Why not indeed, 'the unknown slave', I doubt anyone here would object or call for it to be pulled down.

 

[AngleEyes]

We have many statues celebrating those who helped end it. One of the grandest being this one, erected in honour of Lord Mansfield who wrote the below words, contributing to the ending of slavery in Britain the empire:

We have no slaves at home – Then why abroad?
Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs
Receive our air, that moment they are free.
They touch our country, and their shackles fall.
That's noble, and bespeaks a nation proud.
And jealous of the blessing. Spread it then,
And let it circulate through every vein.

What Lord Mansfield actually ruled is that no person can be captured in England and deported via slavery.
Although slavery was still in existence at the time, and Lord Mansfield judgement had no bearing on that. it was mistakenly assumed that slavery was abolished. It wasn't. It merely meant that slaves could not be captured, or recaptured and shipped out of England against their will.

And Lord Mansfield did not write those words, William Cowper did, it was the last few lines of his poem The Task. He was an ardent abolitionist.

 

[Justin Passing]

It was straightforward criminal damage.
It doesn't matter what the subject was.
Someone's choice to be offended by it, doesn't give them any right to act above the law.

The statue should - imo - have been taken down already, but that's irrelevant.

Imo again, the Attorney General is quite rightly considering Appeal.

 

[EFLImpudence]

It was straightforward criminal damage.
It doesn't matter what the subject was.
Someone's choice to be offended by it, doesn't give them any right to act above the law.

Ok.

The statue should - imo - have been taken down already, but that's irrelevant.

If it had been, then the council workers (or whoever) would not have been guilty of criminal damage.

 

[JohnD]

guilty

It was straightforward criminal damage

and that's why we have trial by jury

though sometimes we may disagree with the results.

 

[motorbiking]

I'd rather they appeal the case rather than start tampering with Sec 5, which sounded like a plan yesterday. Plenty of people mistakenly damage property belonging to another in a non-criminal way. Sec 5, gives a broad defence for someone who honestly thought they had a right.

The appeal cannot challenge the jury's ruling on the subjective element: It is immaterial whether a belief is justified or not if it is honestly held. If the Jury bought it, that can't be challenged.

Lots and lots of criminal damager's get off due to the Jury thinking their cause was just. That is not a valid reason to acquit.

I think the best plan is to seek civil damages, but then the Wokeys will just start a crowd funder to cover it.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Where did I write "guilty"?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

The statue should be put back in its original place, connected to the National Grid at distribution voltage and a fence put around it to prevent direct contact.