Colston Vandals Cleared

[fender62]

the judge just greenlighted it's ok to vandalise, if you don't like a statue or painting just knock it down or rip it up, history is there to be trodden on if it offends you...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10371949/BLM-protestors-not-guilty-criminal-damage-toppling-Edward-Colston-statue-Bristol.html

[naomi24]

How can they be deemed not guilty? We saw them do it. Shameful decision.

[bednobs]

https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Law/Criminal/Question1780086.html

[grumpy01]

British “justice” a laughing stock.

[davebro]

Damn savages...

[Spicerack]

As predicted.

[jno]

awww, a shame they didn't demand that the jury be made up entirely of ABers (or slavers).

[TheChair]

"the judge just greenlighted it's ok"
The judge didn't do any such thing. It was trial by jury.

[Atheist]

Are the upset ABers here saying that they disagree with the current system of trial by jury? What would they prefer? Trial by AB? Trial by judge? Trial by the Daily Mail? Trial by petition or Facebook?
You don't always get what you want, but you should defend the legal process which is followed.

[Mozz71]

//What would they prefer? Trial by AB? Trial by judge? Trial by the Daily Mail? Trial by petition or Facebook?//

A good birching, followed by a fortnight in the stocks.

[jno]

... and then the trial

[davebro]

As NJ would say - we don't know all the facts that would be brought out in court. But on the face of it these vandals have been cleared when irrefutable evidence pointed to their guilt. Brings jury trials into disrepute.

[Spicerack]

Jury trials are becoming a farce. Certain groups of people find it impossible to leave their juvenile politics outside and do what's right.

[jno]

nope, it exalts the right of everyone to be tried by a jury of their peers, just as people demanded in the Magna Carta several centuries back.

[dave50]

I bet the defence did their best to ensure the jury was made up of people who were likely to have the correct political persuasion.

[Atheist]

Some people prefer lynching on the spot, rather than a fair trial. Of course, that wouldn't apply to their own misdemeanors.

[Atheist]

Dave50. Do the defemce have the right to do that? Do the prosecution have the right to do that? Do you know what you are talking about?

[Spicerack]

And the prosecution, dave. I knew there'd be a fix.

[Old_Geezer]

Seems to me that there are times when what occurred is so clear cut that any jury should be instructed on what is the only rational verdict. One ought not have juries sitting that apparently just want to pervert justice because of their personal view.

[Gromit]

My post there was a mass whinge about this on AB I posted...

// There were three events.
1. The toppling of the statue from its plinth.
2. The rolling or dragging to the dock.
3. The plunging of the statue into the dock.

The whole thing probably involved up to 50 people.
It could be argued that the four defendants could not have accomplished this deed without many others who are not on trial. To blame the damage on just four people is clearly incorrect. //

Tue 14th Dec 2021

[Old_Geezer]

All 50, or whatever, should be charged; but the reality is that often only the ringleaders, or perhaps only those guilty that are found, get taken to court. Practicalities of life.