Skip to main content

mastodon - Link to source

Four Palestine Action activists have been sentenced not on the basis of the convictions for criminal damage (through a jury trial) but on the basis their crime *really* was terrorism (a subsequent decision by the presiding judge).

This not only violates the sanctity of jury trials (the jury was not informed of this possibility), it also is a retrospective legal decision, essentially violating the Rule of Law.

Its a direct attack on civil liberties!

#politics #protest
bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9501…


Palestine Action activists jailed over Bristol Elbit factory raid

The case is believed to be the first time that convictions for criminal damage have been classified as terrorism.
Chloe Harcombe (BBC News)
#politics #protest
in reply to Emeritus Prof. Christopher May

Sarah W
mastodon - Link to source
Sarah W
• •
I don't understand how this is legal, it's certainly not moral. Surely justice can only be served if in possession of ALL the facts?
in reply to Sarah W

Emeritus Prof. Christopher May
mastodon - Link to source
Emeritus Prof. Christopher May
• •
Under section 69 of the Sentencing Act the Judge can use their discretion to declare a crime was intended to influence the Govt. and was *actually* terrorism; its doing exactly what it was intended to do; allow a judge to sentence on the basis of an accusation of terrorism that would've been unlikely to have been sustained by a jury (who would might well acquit on that basis)... so an attack on jury's powers of decision & an attack on the norm against retrospective legal findings
⇧