So what’s happening in the courts? The wheels of justice grind on relentlessly as hired thugs in big oil suits pursue those pesky Supporters of Life on Earth through the courts. Justice is blind to the unfolding disaster being planned by politicians and executives.
The endless roll call of magistrates cases has continued over the last two weeks, with several cases of those involved in Civil Resistance in court charged with Wilful Obstruction of the Highway or Breach of Section 12 of the Public Order Act. Wednesday 1st November saw the case against four Just Stop Oil and Animal Rising supporters dismissed due to insufficient evidence, while on November 2nd Epson Judge Goldberry Magistrates court rescheduled the Wimbledon Glitterati 3’s trial to February 2024 as the prosecution had behaved shoddily by failing to serve defendants with required evidence.
Westminster magistrates courts saw scenes of chaos unfolding on Tuesday 31st Oct, as those slow marching with Just Stop Oil who had refused to give their names were brought before court. Multiple Anonymous’ proving difficult for the courts to keep track of. Those who had been held on remand continue to be seen throughout the week. That the courts are now a site of civil resistance is becoming ever more clear. On Thursday in defiance of the Judge asking Sam Griffiths if he would slow march again if released on bail – Sam refused to answer. As a result he is now being held for a month on remand. Later on Thursday he was joined by two others, Chrissy Kelly and Merle Gering. Jailed for walking down a road.
At the High Courts the previous fortnight has been busy – 27th October at Lewes Crown Court those charged with Criminal Damage for the Cobham Service Station petrol pump actions were sentenced. The six people present should have been there with Xavier who died this year in February, he was sorely missed today as Louis McKechnie told the court. The six in court received suspended sentences and community service, they were also ordered to pay £526 in costs.
Over at the Royal Courts of Justice the first group of Just Stop Oil supporters charged with breaking the National Highways M25 Injunction for climbing or attempting to climb onto the motorway gantries were summoned to Court. The case started on Monday 23rd October, with sentencing delivered on Monday 30th October. The two who admitted knowledge of the injunction were given suspended sentences, the 10 who proved they had no knowledge received no sanction. There was a lot of court faff, sorry legal discussion during the trial, with the Judge coming to the decision that lack of knowledge (of the injunction) is not a defence but can be used to mitigate sentence – the injunction that had been obtained the day before at a secret ‘Microsoft teams’ meeting, and then sent out to a few random email addresses with JustStopOil in them. Costs have yet to be decided, they are different to a sentence. This is the “winning” side trying to claim back the money they spent on DLA Piper, over priced lawyers for the injunction.
The 12 Just Stop Oil supporters were represented by a barrister, supported by a solicitor. NHL had more lawyers than you could shake a stick at. Of course they did. All in all another week in which the Judiciary continues to protect those planning to kill us, while pursuing and prosecuting those seeking to defend themselves.
Extinction Rebellion cases are also trundling through the High Court. The glorious XR Fire Truck verdict was allowed to be made public – a resounding Not Guilty for all involved. Dr Gail Bradbrook’s trial concluded this week with a guilty verdict for criminal damage, sentencing to follow. A four year marathon, which saw the first trial jury dismissed, Gail threatened with contempt of court and no defence or reference to motivation allowed. Silenced in Court. In stark contrast the nine women who smashed HSBC’s windows, whose trial started this week have been allowed the defences of ‘necessity’, ‘belief in consent’ and ‘protection of property’, well allowed until they have given their evidence at which point the Judge can rule that they have no defence. I know it doesn’t make sense.
The climate Scientist Wolfgang Knorr has written this piece on what is happening in our courts – its worth a read. You both have and don’t have a legal defence. You have to swear to tell the whole truth, and yet are not allowed to tell the truth. The Jury has legal rights but you can be in contempt of court if you tell them of their rights. You must come to court but you may not defend yourself.
More to come……