Colston 4 Found Not Guilty of Criminal Damage in UK Over Statue Toppling

a reply to: LABTECH767

Lots of rich people try to buy their way into heaven in the latter stages of their lives.
Then again, for some its just some lame conscience easer.

Doesn't excuse what these morons did or what the idiots on the jury decided.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: Loque76
Does this create legal precedent?

Is this now 'open season' for, lets say, a far right group to pull down a Nelson Mandela statue?

Is it a legal defence to say "well they did it and it didn't break the law"?

No. Doesn't work like that. Any similar case would be judged by a jury on it's own merits.

However, it's interesting to read the technicalities that led to the jury's decision in this case:

thesecretbarrister.com... ld-know/

Love the Secret Barrister!

If the AG goes to Appeal, it can't overturn the Jury's verdict. Just maybe get some clarification on the relevant law.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Look at the white privileged Cheering far leftists. Celebrating destruction of statues. Will they go to other countries and do something similar next?

Its sad that so called justice is on their side of BLM.

a reply to: Freeborn

And judging by the picture at the article. Why are always the whites standing up for the BLM? for destroying statues? these morons are the same ones who believe that Churchill was a slave owner and racist.

a reply to: Freeborn

Oh I agree it does not give them an excuse for there behaviour, it was vandalism and anti social behaviour at the end of the day and criminal damage and trespass also come to mind.

But they did not otherwise do any harm and the statue was controversial and growingly unpopular so a slap on the wrist BUT a guilty verdict is the way I would have taken it and I think that is probably the opinion of the CPS as well whom are considering appealing the verdict.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Freeborn

Oh I agree it does not give them an excuse for there behaviour, it was vandalism and anti social behaviour at the end of the day and criminal damage and trespass also come to mind.

But they did not otherwise do any harm and the statue was controversial and growingly unpopular so a slap on the wrist BUT a guilty verdict is the way I would have taken it and I think that is probably the opinion of the CPS as well whom are considering appealing the verdict.

They can't appeal the verdict. That's not what the AG is considering.

a reply to: vNex92

Pompous, arrogant, self-indulgent, privileged, sanctimonious tossers who've never had to want for anything and never done a proper days graft in their lives.

Its got # all to do with being white....they're just proper woke arseholes.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: vNex92

Pompous, arrogant, self-indulgent, privileged, sanctimonious tossers who've never had to want for anything and never done a proper days graft in their lives.

Its got # all to do with being white....they're just proper woke arseholes.

You might say that, I couldn't possibly comment!

😉

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: vNex92

Pompous, arrogant, self-indulgent, privileged, sanctimonious tossers who've never had to want for anything and never done a proper days graft in their lives.

Its got # all to do with being white....they're just proper woke arseholes.

Did they know about the European White Slave Trade? this also existed to. There whites whom were slaves the issue today is that Irish, Scots and others in modern Europe today they have a hard time debating it.


If only this white woke in Western Europe knew the actually history and even now slavery, human trafficking of others is still happening.

a reply to: vNex92

Did they know about the European White Slave Trade? this also existed to.

I guess their counter argument to that would be that there aren't any statues to those involved in the 'white slave trade'.

I don't think the morality behind the slave trade is really the issue here - I've never seen anyone here on ATS try to defend it and most people are aware that slavery has existed in almost every civilisation in one form or another since time immemorial - but rather the outcome of the trial of these morons who believe they are on some sort of moral crusade.

Start a thread on slavery through the ages up to and including today and I'll gladly contribute....but this isn't the place for that discussion.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2


This is an OJ of a verdict.

So, if these folks are ultimately found not guilty it means

1. I can blow up Parliament because I, and many others, find it offensive, and

2. Having blown up Parliament I would be creating jobs by way of the clean up and thus helping the economy.

Above is the same stream of argument as presented by the Secret Barrista.

If I turned over Milos camper van for example I'd get nicked and Milo wouldn't see the legal argument, he'd just want damages.

Just because the defendants had a mouthpiece smarted than the CPS doesn't mean they were not guilty.

This statue is a negative reaction an it's understandable and I'm sure the same controversial. What difference would it make to go to Egypt and break an Egyptian statue because these Egyptians in their past owned slaves. Yes controversial yet the Statue is a historic memory in the UK. The Statue is worth a lot of money at an auction I'm sure. The ones in Egypt are priceless. This should be a year jail sentence.

a reply to: AndyCafe

You make a good point, even though I am in favour of a more lenient sentence I do agree with what you have said.

Sadly Isis did that in Iraq and Syria and the Taliban did it to ancient priceless statues and monuments in Afghanistan and we really don't want that here even if I do regard this particular statue as having found it's rightful home inside a museum and oddly the controversy over it has brought a man to public attention that perhaps no one today really cared or knew about.

But if you want to know what really got me annoyed it was the renaming of British Streets to be named after figures from the by that time ethnic minority's that had moved in and replaced or actually in many cases displaced the original British residents of those areas.

You know though it was actually the Tory's that were behind that ethnic influx NOT LABOUR, Oh Labour sold out but it was actually Lord Mountbatten that said to the Indians and Pakistani's and Bangladeshi's (and by default everyone else) whom said to them "Why don't you come and live with us", he may have meant the rich and the elite but that is not how it played out and his status was such that the Government both Right and Left adopted his invitation as part of there policy on immigrations into our nation and what is more the Tory's saw an opportunity to destabilise Labour and even the Welfare state by doing so.

By funnelling these ethnic migrants into the poorest working class areas of the nation, the heartlands of Labour Support they sought to divide Labour Voters and to break apart Labour solidarity, they succeeded all to well.

The Predictable knee jerk reaction was for the displaced and otherwise disgruntled working class to end up turning on there own party, this was compounded by the fact that Labour had thrown it's coat into the ring fully with the Tory's on this policy as if they did not know what the Tory's were up to or something which makes me seriously wonder at the integrity of the party at that time.

Oddly though after a generation and into the third generation here the vast majority of the still rapidly growing Asian community within the UK were very anti EU and wanted us out as did most people in the nation (and whatever there differences they ARE British now), not for the same reasons as old Bojo's crowd though and he has broken so many of his Brexit promises it is laughable in a very angry laughing manner.

With rising energy prices and no greater argument for the renationalization of our national assets I do wonder how many of the electorate have woken up and realized they voted for the wrong side that time around, oh not voting out of the EU I did that but they voted for Bojo on the basis that they believed the Tory lies about Corbyn.

I still voted labour but had plenty of bones of contention with Corbyn though broadly I fully supported his policy's but my bones were these.

Weak leadership (So is Boris though so?).
Openly undermining our nuclear deterrent.
Having perhaps the worst shadow cabinet in history with the exception of John McDonell whom should have taken over the leadership in my opinion.
Being too in favour of migration into our country.

But on the other hand his policy's were.
More houses newly built to end homelessness and to give your kids somewhere affordable to live.
Restoration of Tenants right's.
Renationalization of assets Thatcher, Major, Blair and Cameron sold off (Boris has continued the sell of and sold off Chobham armour to the Yank's so what's next the NHS or even our Police Forces).
FULL Restoration of the NHS including dental treatment back in public hands (no more DO NOT RESUSCITATE signs on learning impaired or disabled people (under the Tory's the NHS has gone full bloody NAZI and I would not be surprised if they were not unofficially Euthanising (MURDERING) people that some quack decides is worthless and not worthy of life).
FULL Restoration of our Publicly owned and operated university's and colleges ensuring that higher education was once again available to everyone.
Restoration of Subsidies to struggling British Industry (that is the PRIVATE Sector) to aid it during uneconomic times.
Full reclaiming of our power, gas and water (Currently when you pay your bill's you are actually paying for other nations nationalized industry's including on our rail network as other EU nations did not sell everything off and indeed they bought chunk's of our infrastructure to be able to charge us more and use that profit to subsidise there own networks and power grid's, notably France and Germany were BIG BIG Vultures in the buy up of assets sold by the Tory's and so called New Labour).

So how many now feel the egg on there faces for voting bloody Tory?.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2


Wow.

They admitted it, and still got nothing?

I just don't understand how an admission of law breaking , doesn't trigger some kind of law for mandatory sentencing.